Evolution is supported by scientific evidence

Thanks to Fatso for responding.I will first refute Fatso's arguments, before moving on to my own.1. Macroevolution has never been observedMacroevolution,or the production of new species, has been observed. For example, a new species of goatsbeards, a type of wildflower, produced fertile offspring. However, the new species can only mate with other plants of the new species, but not the normal type of goatsbeards. [1] The goatbeard species appeared naturally without tampering and breeding by people. [1]2. Lack of transitional fossils/contineous fossil recordThe argument that there are gaps between fossils is bunk. For example, many transitional fossils have, indeed, been found. [2] Transitional fossils are not a direct decendent of one organism and what created the next. They just have to have features from both species, and be consistent with the predictions of evolution.[2] Also, saying that gaps in the fossil record means that evolution is false is fallacious. By that argument, your brain does not exist because we cannot observe it, even if there is evidence of it existing. The scientific method works this way: evolution is currently supported by evidence, which is why it is in textbooks. If evidence is against evolution, the theory is changed to fit the new evidence. 3.Cambrian explosionThe Richard Dawkins quote was quote mined/taken out of context. He was actually saying that the "sudden appearance" of organisms was actually caused by the imperfections of the fossil record.[3] Also, the cambrian explosion was caused by evolution, and there WAS evidence of their ancestors. Multicellar complex species have existed before the cambrian explosion, so the cambrian explosion did not create all of them.[4] Also, there were transitional fossils leading up to the cambrian explosion, such as lobopods, between anthropods and worms.[4] The cambrian explosion was hardly sudden, and estimates put it between 5-40 million years. [4] This is evidence that it was caused by evolution.4. Vestigial organsVestigial organs do not have to be useless. They just have to be a trace lost by something that disappeared, like leg bones in snakes. While leg bones in snakes or remanents of eyes in blind cave fish may have a use, they are still vestiges because they were left behind from evolution and used to serve more purpose than now. [5]Now, to the evidence for evolution.A. Useless genetical materialThe human genome project has found useless genetical material, such as instructions for making a tail and other organs that are not present on the human body anymore. [6] This is evidence for evolution because it shows that, because we no longer need a tail to balance ourselves, a mutation that prevents humans from growing tails will not be harmful, but rather will be neutral. Because it was a neural mutation, individuals with the mutation are just as likely to survive to reproduce as the ones without. This is why humans no longer have tails.B. Observed speciationIf we do observe macroevolution, and the observation was proven to be true, then it is pretty strong evidence for evolution. The logic is like this:P1: If macroevolution is observed, it is most likely to be trueP2: Macroevolution is observedC: Macroevolution is most likely to be trueA new species is defined as a group of organisms that can reproduce and give fertile offspring. For example, different races of humans are not species because they can produce fertile offspring. However, if there were to be a new species that can only produce fertile offspring if it mates with the same species, it is a new species.Knowing that, we know that the goatbeard example I stated above is speciation, or macroevolution, because the new species of goatbeard can only produce fertile offspring when breeding with the new species of goatbeard.Sources:[1]http://www.talkorigins.org...[2]http://www.talkorigins.org...[3]http://www.talkorigins.org...[4]http://www.talkorigins.org...[5]http://www.talkorigins.org...[6]www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5LzKupeHtw