Is there any viable, provable evidence for evolution

For your first point, there is a verifiable scientific phenomenon that does explain the gaps in the fossil record. The Flood, as described in the Bible, as well as cultures from practically every continent, would account for it. Here is why it would explain the fossil record, the gaps therein, and the less known petrified trees that vertically intersect multiple layers in the fossil record, which is unexplainable from the standpoint of evolution. First off, it accounts for the lack of change between species. In the event of a world wide flood, all animal species would be caught as they were. They would all be roughly the same with slight differences in each species (which accounts for micro evolution). Secondly, the Flood accounts for the way that the fossils line up. Enclosed is a link to a picture of roughly how the fossil record aligns itself (www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange1/current/lectures/complex_life/fossil_record.html) Obviously, this is not by any means a good representation, and I'm sure I could find better if I looked, but I lack the proper time right now. This picture illustrates my next point. If you look, you will see small organisms at the bottom, then fish, then large dinosaurs, then smaller mammals. This is heralded as proof for evolution, but it is also proof for the flood. The smallest organisms are at the bottom because they exist at the bottom of the ocean. Then the fish would next be caught by shifting earth, and they would be entombed next. Then the largest animals, the dinosaurs would sink to the bottom next, followed by the smaller mammals. That lines up pretty closely to the picture shown of the fossil record. Third, in case you ask how the fossils form in so short of a time, that is easily answered. Petrification is possible when materials are protected from decay by layers of sediment. In a flood, many animals and plants would be placed in those types of scenarios. Thus, a lot of animals would be made into fossils. Also, the flood explains the petrified trees phenomenon. For the uninformed, there have been many petrified trees, usually in coal deposits, that run vertically through many different layers of the fossil records. Some are even upside down. This presents a problem to evolution, as it is hard to explain how a tree could stand for millions of years while being petrified bit by bit, and upside down trees present even more of a challenge to explain. However, in light of the flood, it is simply to explain. Trees float until they are water logged, and then they sink. Many trees would have been uprooted by the flooded, and would have waterlogged, and sunk into the ground, while more layers would have been built up around them. Also, a coal deposit is explained by large quantities of biowaste being collected and sunk by the flood, which would have turned into coal. So that is a verifiable scientific phenomenon that fully explains the gaps in the fossil record, and the contradictions that are made when it is viewed in a evolutionist light. Additionally, I am not called upon to provide an alternative to evolution, because my position is that it is wrong, not necessarily that I have another one. Science is not about keeping one theory that is proved wrong until we have a better one, but about removing the bad theories and then getting new ones. For your second point, I have two words for you: Fruit flies. Yes, I am going to debunk your second point with fruit flies. If evolution happens, it is not measured in years but in generations. Now, this is an important point. If one creature had a time gap between generations of 10 years, and it took 2.7 billion years for it change to a new species, then it would not take another creature with a time gap of only one year between generations the same amount of times, because the micro-evolutions would happen quicker by having more generations, and would speed up the process of changing from one generation to another. Now, it just so happens that we have a creature that has one of the shortest time gaps between generations: fruit flies. Evolutionist scientists have been working on mutating fruit flies for over half a century in order to induce macro evolution. Now, there have been extraordinary mutations, most of them harmful and few of them helpful. However, there is not the slightest indication of a change from a fruit fly to some other species entirely. Now, given that the time gap between generations for the fruit fly is about 7, and the scientists enormously speed up the micro-evolution part by inducing mutations by numerous ways, like catalyzing them with x-rays, this result is not very good for evolutionists. Because Macro evolution is supposed to be a gradual process, the flies being worked on should have some sort of species change. However, this is not the case. They have remained fruit flies. So, although there might not have been much change, there should have been some species change, and there was none. For your third point, the existence of atavisms do not prove shared genetic heritage. The example of dolphins and whales born with leg-like apparatuses is explainable. Some whales have a pair of bones that serve as a organ anchor. Sometimes, a defect will cause extra bone to be attached to them. Kinda like extra fingers or nipples on humans. And around these bones will form flesh. These are nowhere near a functioning leg, and to get that it proves that whales originally came from land takes pretty good imagination. Also, the account of human newborns having a natural tail is false. There has been one newborn that had a tail, but it was all fat, and a defect. Some embryos have what look like tails, but are not. They are reabsorbed into the body, and are used in the development of the baby