Sounds improbable to me. I doubt the word was coined to refute scripture. Personally, I don't see the idea as being very essential to evolutionary theory. Mutation occurs and is passed on at the individual level, period!<quoted text>
Yes you are correct it doesn't disprove Macroevolution. But maybe you can understand why (many) Christian, Jewish, and Islam faiths do not except macro evolution as to have ever happened. While it may seem trivial the word Kind vs species the word Kind has been around and used long before species. And what science now claims as a new species does not align with the Biblical definition of Kind is. We see it as a Modern word game to help support evolution.
The idea of a "macro" evolutionary strategy is flawed. It's like saying that the predecessors of birds decided to take several steps to become birds. That doesn't happen. What does happen is that environmental conditions occur that allow a species to bridge a gap between their old niche and a new one. Without those conditions, no birds would happen.
I don't know if it's your interpretation or the logic that is flawed, but I won't defend it.