With all due respect, that thinking is wrong. Variation is called 'micro-evolution' and requires no new information in the genetic material. It is simply a matter of mix and match which occurs with sexual reproduction.
"Macro-evolution" refers to changes in form and/or function, which simple variation cannot achieve.
They are not close at all. There is a genetic chasm between them which no evolutionist in the world really has an idea how it can be crossed, except through imagination and declaration -- neither one of which matter a whit to the genes!
Natural selection, in the meantime, is something that does happen. It does not produce more variation, however, but less. Each time an event or niche results in natural selection, there is a segment of the population involved which dies or simply does not reproduce. This denies the rest of the population any variation in genetic heritage which that non-breeding part of the population had to offer. In other words, natural selection, first of all, can only select from what is already there, and, secondly, selects by eliminating part of the population which does not have that trait.
This produces a smaller population, more inbreeding, and an eventual fitness peak as a result, which finally leads to an endangered species. This is not how 'evolution' is supposed to work!