Evolution is most likely true

Hello and thank you for debating with me, BecauseCheetas. I’d like to introduce myself; my name is Daniel, and I am 12 years old. I hope we both can stay civil and polite. Since you presented your arguments in round one while I did not, I ask that you please do not participate in the final round to balance our turns out.There are many different reasons why we believe in evolution. Of course, a deity could have created life, but there is no doubt in the scientific world that evolution has and is occurring. In fact, a Pew Research Center poll showed that close to 97% of scientists accept the Theory of Evolution.[1] There are many different pieces of evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution. To name a few, vestigial structures, transitional fossils, ring species, and more. I’ll address three pieces of evidence in the favor of evolution.Argument one: vestigial structures)Vestigial structures are structures in an organism that has lost all or most of it’s original function in the course of evolution. To simplify that, let’s take human “goosebumps”, or piloerection. When humans were more “ape-like” we had much more hair covering our body, our piloerection abilities allowed us to make us appear larger to scare off predators and maintain our body heat.Mark Pagel, head of the evolutionary biology group at the University of Reading in England explains that we may have lost fur because of dangerous insects and diseases that are easy to catch with body hair, or possibly we lost fur because of a hotter climate than the Chimpanzee population.[2] Even though we lost our fur, our piloerection function remained because of it’s neutral effects on our survival.Some other examples of vestigial structures in our body are the appendix, 2 chromosome, and the pinky toe.Argument two: ring species)I think this wikipedia page words it rather nicely: “In biology, a ring species is a connected series of neighbouring populations, each of which can interbreed with closely sited related populations, but for which there exist at least two ‘end’ populations in the series, which are too distantly related to interbreed, though there is a potential gene flow between each "linked" population. Such non-breeding, though genetically connected, ‘end’ populations may co-exist in the same region thus closing a ‘ring’”Ring species strengthen the argument for evolution by showing an example of small characteristic changes slowly occurring until speciation.An example of ring species would be the Ensatina salamanders in California that exhibit subtle morphological and genetic differences all along their range. They all interbreed with their immediate neighbors with one exception: where the extreme ends of the range overlap in Southern California, E. klauberi and E. eschscholtzii do not interbreed.Argument three: observed instances of evolution)Contrary to popular belief, evolution has in fact been observed. This URL contains a whole list with references of observed evolution: http://www.talkorigins.org...Thank you for debating with me. If you have any questions or couldn’t understood what I meant in any part of my argument, just ask in the comment section.Sincerely,MyWoodenHeart[1] http://www.people-press.org...[2] http://www.scientificamerican.com...[3] http://www.talkorigins.org...