Most convincing evidence for evolutionary theory

And evolution itself is a fact--we witness species changing over time.

How should these contradictory statements be resolved? Are you trying to say that evolution is only possible in a devolving environment, whatever that is?

So you're saying that we *have* made empirical observations of evolution, albeit in a devolving environment.

And what is particularly telling, is the problem of origin, in that, evolution (as an assumed universal trait; cosmologically or biologically) does not show itself in any form that is emperical.

And now you're saying that we've never made empirical observations of evolution, including biologically.

This discussion... has, in a sense, focused on a straw man; the myth of a self-replicating RNA molecule that arose de novo from a soup of random polynucleotides. Not only is such a notion unrealistic in light of our current understanding of prebiotic chemistry, but it should strain the credulity of even an optimist's view of RNA's catalytic potential...Without evolution it appears unlikely that a self replicating ribozyme could arise, but without some form of self-replication there is no way to conduct an evolutionary search for the first, primitive self-replicating ribozyme.

From your side of fence and returning to the actual topic, what do you see as the most convincing evidence for evolutionary theory?

UNKNOWN CHEMICALS in the primordial past...through...
UNKNOWN PROCESSES which no longer exist...produced...
UNKNOWN LIFE FORMS which are not to be found...but could, through
UNKNOWN REPRODUCTION METHODS spawn new life...in an...
UNKNOWN ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION...in an...
UNKNOWN OCEANIC SOUP COMPLEX...at an...
UNKNOWN TIME and PLACE.

“With Darwinian evolution, we’re dealing with something that is much more than a scientific theory; it’s a creation story. In fact, it’s the creation myth of our culture. Every culture has a creation myth, which tells the people where they came from, what is ultimately ”real’, and how they relate to that, and where they should get their knowledge- their information from.Every culture has a priesthood that has custody of this creation story and that gives that knowledge. In our culture, the priesthood is not the clergy or the ministers in church, it’s the intellectual class, and especially the scientists.So the Darwinian story says that ultimately all that is ”real’ is nature. Nature is all there is, and nature is composed of matter; the particles making up matter and energy that physicists study.So, this is the philosophy called naturalism, or materialism. And since that’s all there is, it follows, that matter must have done all the creating that had to be done; that is to say, matter, unassisted by God, or any other intelligent force. According to materialism, a mind can’t exist until it evolves mindlessly from matter.And so it follows that we are the products of an unguided, purposeless material force; which specifically is called Darwinian evolution when you get to the history of life.
And so we get our information about it (and really, information about everything) from science.”