This is why I wanted to discuss facts Bex. Creationists don't seem to be very interested in finding facts themselves, only twisting what they can to fit their creationist models, but I'm happy to discuss any concrete ideas that emerge here. You can only say that evolution is not "fact" because, like everything else, it is not 100% provable. Gravity is not 100% provable, but presumably you accept the fact that you can't fly off the ground as some reasonable proof that it exists?

And debate and uncertainty amongst scientists is how we come up with new and better ideas, how we ultimately get closer to the truth. You will not find any of these people, not even the ones claiming that longisquama insignis is a true bird, saying Oh that's that then, let's throw the entire idea of evolution in the bin then and all just say everything was created by a god. Saves us a lot of work anyway.

About your assertion that variation is limited to "within kinds." What is a "kind" (other than a Biblical term)? Creationists have identified kinds with everything from species to entire kingdoms. By the narrower definitions, variation to new kinds has occurred. By the broader definitions, we would not expect to see it in historical time.

Helacyton gartleri shows one example of change that would be hard to call anything other than a change in kind. It is an amoeba-like life form that came from a human (Van Valen and Maoirana 1991; evolved from a carcinoma, it spreads by taking over other laboratory cell cultures).

Creationists have never hinted at, much less shown, any mechanism that would limit variation. Without such a mechanism, we would expect to see kinds vary over time, becoming more and more different from what they were at a given time in the past.

You really seem to be saying that it's impossible for us to know what happened in the past. Are you not at all curious? I guess not, absolutist ideas like creationism tend to stamp that out of people, they give you the security of feeling you know the answers so why look. I'll say it again, we have plenty of evidence for what happened in earth's geological and biological past across many different scientific disciplines. So far I have not elaborated on this because it would be a very long list and people learn these things in school -- ah but it's all lies isn't it. If you want me to start listing these things just tell me.

There is plenty of evidence that humans evolved from apes. It's just that creationists blind themselves to it. You're not going to see macroevolution in humans right now, or in many generations back, because that isn't how it works for species with our lifespans and reproductive rates. I can give you plenty of other examples of macroevolution taking place right now, though, in other species that do have much higher reproductive rates, e.g. lab cultures. Easy to overlook, isn't it, because bacteria in a lab dish aren't as evocative an image as lions or tigers, and I sincerely doubt if many creationists have ever set foot in a lab. (No doubt you can tell me about some who did, who decided to put their literal faith in the Bible ahead of their science and left reason and logic littered all over the lab floors.) Would you like me to list some instances of observed macroevolution?

Can you explain what you mean by "half-formed" creatures? Is this the "what use is half a wing" argument? If that is seriously what you mean, please let me know. I'd be disappointed, though, I know you are more intelligent than this.

I'm happy to teach students that there are uncertainties within evolution. I'd even be happy to challenge evolution itself, if convincing evidence came up to the contrary. I have not seen anything that any creationist has said here so far that remotely fits that description and neither have evolutionary scientists.

Blinding yourself to the mountain of evidence across scientific disciplines and then saying there's no evidence is pretty feeble. Why do I find mysef thinking I'm going to say this time and time again. If you refuse to acknowledge what is staring you in the face then fair enough that's your choice I guess.