They don't seem to understand that making that statement is a stupid as saying "I believe in the 400m but not the marathon".
It's the same basic mechanism on a much grander scale.
What it boils down to is they denied ALL evolution until the evidence for microevolution got to be too overpowering, then they admitted "Well, of COURSE microevolution occurs, it says so in the bible (and warp a passage to fit their aims) but that still doesn't explain MACRO-evolution"
I predict that when the evidence for macro-evolution becomes too overpowering, they will suddenly decide "well of COURSE macroevolution occurs. It's predicted in the bible. But that still doesn't explain Abiogenesis"
Throughout time, this is the dance we do. Religion denies a concept. Science proves said concept. Religion takes a step back, claims they knew it all along, and cites the NEXT unknown as proof of god.