Is Evolution fact or fiction

"Just because it's not scientific text doesn't mean it' not a fact for example they use to teach that everything revolves around the earth but later to be proven wrong."That's a really interesting quote. Descartes would be proud. I agree with Pro on his skeptical doubts. However, what this implies is that we cannot know anything. If many propositions that were facts in the past were later disproved, then the same can, and most probably will, happen with all the prepositions regarded as true. Then, we can know nothing. This means that concepts as true or false have no function, cause we cannot know if something if true or false. Then, this debate is just a waste of time. Then, all this site is just a waste of time.Don't panic. There is one way to return to the safety of true and false having this paradigm. Pragmatism. Pragmatism realises the incognoscible nature of the universe, so they decide if something is true or false in a different way. A true proposition is one which predicts an explain phenomena in the most precise way.Evolution is, by far, the better explanation of phenomena in the species topic. It predicts the species dynamics (how a specie will evolve), it gives a reasonable explanation to the fossil record, it predicted the DNA similarities between certain species, and so on. So far, evolution is the best theory out there regarding to the formation of species. It's evolution wrong? Maybe. Is quite probable that a few years from now some bright mind discovers a new theory. However, evolution is the best we have at the moment. According to the pragmatic view of modern sciences, this makes evolution true."when you see a fossil in the ground the only thing you could prove is that it died you can't prove it was a male or female you especially can't prove it had any children let alone any children different to it's own kind just like the Bible says." If you studied some biology you would know this is false. When scientist study a fossil, they can determine when it lived, how they died, if they had children or not, etc. Also, studying the DNA found in some fossils, they can determine they link between different species."And how would you know that animal is evolving just by looking at the fossil."You don't look at just one fissile. You look at all the fossils in a chronological and geographic way. Then, having in mind time space coexistence and DNA links you determine the evolution chain."I think that it's more of Micro evolution because it's making small changes (talking about micro organisms and bacteria)"Well, for a human, the amount of change that happens in micro organisms is pretty small. However, we must remember that humans are thousands of millions of times bigger. What for us is small, for bacteria is huge. Besides that, the changes are big enough to form new species, so even if they were "small", they prove macro evolution."If apes or monkeys were our ancestors then were are the fossils of apes evolving into humans and why ain't apes evolving into humans right now."This is a common misconception. Humans don't descend form monkeys. Actually, we have the common ancestors. That's why our DNA is so similar."The only thing that changes from generation to generation is the characteristics of the individual"Again, lots of small changes make a big one. Imagine your have a sun that grows to be an inch taller. That's quite a small difference. But imagine that the same happens to your sun's sun, and to your sun's sun's sun, and so on. Eventually, one sun will be like 20 foots tall. A human isn't 20 foots tall, so there you would have a different species."I think approximately 6,000 years ago God created the heavens and the universe"I won't discuss the existence of god, that's a whole other debate. However, there's plenty of conclusive evidence that shows the earth is not 6000 years old. For instances, charcoal that has like 20,000 years old."4400 years ago there was a flood that killed everyone in the world but 8 people that's why we have the fossils and all of these canyons "The thing is that, if the universe is 6000 years old, those fossils we have found are older than the universe itself.Also, a flood couldn't form the canyons. If canyons were formed by a flood, that flood must have been a very long flood (millions of years, because of the erosion rate of water). So, or the canyons were made of sugar or they were not formed by a flood." I know that there is a God that created everything and again I think it's silly to think that everything got here by chance."As a matter of fact, the existence of a god is compatible with evolution. Evolution explains the formation of species, not the origin of life. Maybe god created life and then it evolved. So the existence of god does not disprove evolution.Also is not that silly to think everything got here by chance. Quantum physics shows us that universes may divide any time an event happens, so that every universe has a different result. So we live in the universe that had this result, but there are other universe were results were different and life formed different, or maybe it didn't formed at all.What always puzzles me is how an eternal and non created universe is less logical than an eternal and non created god.Great debate so far. Cheers!