I think it might be. Recently, Creation scientists have made some concessions to logic and reality. One example is the laudatory acceptance of one kind of Darwinian natural selection by most Creation scientists. Micro evolution has been posited by many creation scientists to explain the otherwise thorny problem of the 500,000 species of beetles, not to mention the many species of monkeys, rodents, and so on. A simple calculation would show that 2 of every living species simply wouldn’t fit on any ark that could have been built by Noah. So now we have God’s creation of the various “kinds” of animals, on Day 5, and the post-Flood micro evolution of each kind into all the genera and species we see today. It appears (although I am not certain of this) that this theory makes use of standard Darwinian evolution, including mutation and natural selection to explain the immense variety of birds, insects, fish and mammals.
Assuming that all of this is true, and I have not misunderstood the idea, then we have experienced a great step forward from the time when Creation science simply dismissed all possible evolutionary change as anti Biblical. While they continue to maintain that a mouse cannot become a cat and so on, the willingness to agree that a cat and a cougar might have undergone common descent from some feline that made it onto the Ark is wonderful progress. I say that because such willingness implies the acceptance of the overarching principle of evolution, namely natural selection and common descent.
I think therefore that we should welcome those who say they believe in micro evolution but not in macro evolution with sincere delight, and encourage them to convey this message as broadly as possible to those who have not heard it. We should not emphasize too strongly that there is no difference between the micro and macro evolution, and that by accepting micro evolution, the creationist has stepped onto the slippery slope leading to full acceptance of evolution as God’s law of biology.
I have not been able to determine when this shift took place, and if it has indeed become general consensus among creationists. It might in fact be limited to some proponents of ID or OEC, and I would welcome any insight readers might have on these questions.