Show me all the evidence built up for purple sea monkeys and see if that matches all the evidence for evolution and you might have a point. But since you can't you just showed how out of your league you are here because that was really, really unintelligent. And no, I've stated that evolution is by far (understatement) the most well founded explanation for how life came to be, and what I said to you now isn't an argument for evolution but merely a deconstruction of the argument you made. You definitely need to learn to separate such fundamental things if you're to be discussing anything.
So you think (macro) evolution is the most well founded(whatever that means) explanation for how life began? Well...thats like your opinion man. And given that you can't demonstrate, observe, repeat, or predict (macro) evolution it can never be anything other than an opinion. An opinion most human beings do not share.
The evidence you tout is nothing more than circumstantial evidence that one has to draw a conclusion about. One has to use their personal judgement and bias to reach their conclusion. And guess what? Different people look at the evidence and draw different conclusions.
For example, you'll look at a piece of jawbone and draw in a whole ape like man around it and call it proof of something. I've said it before and I'll say it again...that's not science, thats arts and crafts.
So again, how can you say that something that has plenty of evidence supporting it definitely can't happen if you at the same time don't know what options are available?
Again, I agree with you. I can't completely rule out (macro) evolution just like I can't completely rule out purple sea monkeys. I have however...seen no convincing evidence for either.
Evolution makes perfect sense theoretically,
There is nothing sensible about random mutations forming all the life around us. Once again that is just your opinion and one most human beings do not share.
at least to anyone with decent education and that's not an unintelligent supporter of blind belief that will have a clear agenda since his fairy tale is being threatened by observation and evidence. There's plenty of scientists that challenge the theory in the name of science (and we've had plenty of changes to it) but they of course don't come off as dumb as your simple refutes.
You feel better now?
What doesn't make sense is that you're asking for direct proof for things that's happened over millions of years. Of course that's not going to be available.
I only asked for proof to illustrate the fact that you can't provide any. I'm sorry man but until you can demonstrate, observe, repeat, or predict (macro) evolution then all you got is a personal opinion. You don't have proof. All you have is a theory based on flimsy evidence and flawed logic. Well, in my humble opinion of course.
There's plenty of evidence around though and all findings support the theory. You just disagree because you're a blind supporter of a fairy tale that definitely doesn't align with the findings that have been made, plus that you've proven to be so uneducated that you didn't even know what a theory is. If you fail at comprehension of such fundamental things you're of course not going to understand much about the talk around the theory of evolution.
There's a reason you don't have proper phylogeny charts of "kinds", because it will make it all that much clearer that it doesn't even come close to adding up.
Look at how much of your post is dedicated to pure insult. This is what happens when you challenge an evolutionists faith. They react the same way a muslim does when someone draws muhammad.