The phrase "Evolution is a fact"

I`m not sure I understand what you are saying. Evolution hapens on it`s own through natural processes (natural selection, climate, etc.) not by purposfully introducing something different into a population. Such as dog breeding, is that or is not intelligent design? By humans of course, but it has a specific purpose, to exploit the attributes of certain types from certain animals. But in what way have we acctually obsereved as scientists the effects of evolution without any outside influence. I mean technically, I understand the fact that if we take two animals and breed them the offspring would then most likely have attributes of both parents. But the fact remains that if you leave things to their own devices man has never noted any significant changes in a population over time. And if we had then natural selection would be thrown out the window because appearently it happens faster than, natural selection would allow for an entire population to change into a new spieces.

But see the point is that the mainstream Darwinian view of evolution says that life changes on accident, but how can you explain this when you point out the nylon eating bacteria? A new niche opened up for an organizm to fill, so it was filled by a bacteria whom never existed before. This would lead me to believe that it purposefully happened because there was a reason to have happened. For instance, what reason would this species have come into being, obviously they had enough food to survive as they were so why the new diet? Because it could? Maybe it was because for eveything on earth, nothing is ever wasted, even excriment has its role in life. And every niche gets filled appearently some very quickly as these bacteria have shown.
BTW I did not join this forum to ridicule others for their beliefs or be ridiculed, I am here to learn with an open mind. I personally believe in God, but I do not expect everyone else to. Edited by crawler30, : grammar

you used the nylon eating bacteria as an observation of evolution but if no one observed the mutation only the outcome and the lineage has not been identified, then how was this "evolution" observed? I understand that it is a new species but I am not sure how to classify it as having been observered to have changed. A scientific observation includes the entire change or the residual effects of the change, such as energy release etc. which would not solely be based on the fact that there was suddenly one day a new species itself in an uncontrolled environment with any number of species and outside influences acting on the lineage of this new species. Right?