There is always contention about a theory, though you will find very little among scientists regarding whether or not evolution actually happened. RAZD started out here by defining terms in a way that I think he hoped would defuse some of the antagonism towards the ToE and show that it need not be threatening to a theist. I think it's worth having a look at what he said in the threads he started here.

The ToE, like most theories, is based on observation. It fits what we see. And the knowledge across different branches of science also validates it, though as we've seen there's always disagreement about the hows.



I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. If you're unsure of what the ToE actually says, then RAZD has given some good definitions here. It basically describes how organisms have changed over time. I don't think that the occurrence of this change can be in doubt unless you have an alternative explanation for the sorting of the fossil record.

I suppose if I had to boil it down to the three most convincing pieces of evidence I see for myself, I would say:

-- the sorting of the fossil record
-- nested hierarchies, or specific patterns in the variation of species that we can observe both in existing and extinct species
-- genetic relationships between species, which also shows a specific pattern.

I gave Bex a longer list in the "More Biblical Evidence" thread and I think it made a lot of work for both of us. You might, however, check out what we both have said there.

If you don't think these three things that I've listed here are strong evidence for evolution (especially when considered as a group and as only part of the whole existing body of evidence), can you please explain why?