Evidence for evolution

I accept evolution on authority, not because I really know that much
about it.I understand the theory (in general). I don't need to know about that. What I am interested in is knowing what the most solid, most convincing evidence is for this theory.The audience: somewhat educated but not specialized. In other words, you cannot expect them to know the esoteric jargon of evolutionary biologists. Give it to us in plain language. (This might be one of
the reasons for the creationist movement. They don't know what the real evidence is.) I don't, not really.

Great! Very clear. (the DNA reference is not clear, but I can ask about that later).How do we know for sure what's later and what's earlier as regards the fossil records?

Great stuff, Ned. First you have the layers and dating and then you have much later the DNA (this is still vague to me) to back it up. I'll study those sites you gave me before asking more questions, but you've made the basics very clear to me.Thanks.

Is it a matter of looking at an earlier fossil and a later fossil and determining that they are closely related according to the DNA? Something like that?

Oh, I see. You get the DNA samples mostly from living species. Does the DNA degrade or something when it gets real old?

Has the relatively recent emergence of DNA analytic techniques verified the older conclusions based on the dating methods--the layer the fossil is in, and the "radio-active dating" or whatever they use, to the point of great certainty?Would you say that evolutionary theory (not all the details of how, of course, but general macroevolution, including human evolution)is much more certain than, say, Big Bang Theory?

How certain? Can you compare it to something else that is just as certain?

I just wanted to know if evolution was very, very certain or just fairly probable. Other posters say there's no doubt about it.

But the Big Bang would not be on that level of certainty, correct?It is also a "scientific theory."

And the theory of relativity? Is there much empirical evidence of that?

By the way what is all this "IMHO" and "IMO" and "IOW" stuff? Is that like a secret code?

IMHO--IOW, IMO, based on what I have heard here (BOWIHHH), TOE is a ND (no-doubter). IMHO.

IMHO, that life has a history and has changed over time is not exactly TOE.

Could you give an example?

I always have questions.What is the empirical evidence for life evolving from non-life?I know that is not the TOE proper. But it's rather important.