[music_code]

We have fossil transitional species and we have genetic evidence that "macroevolution" has occurred, and we have observed mechanisms that allow this.

You cannot make absolute statements like the above. The most you can say is, "we believe that fossil transitional species exist based on the fossil record as we see it" and "we believe that we see genetic evidence of macroevolution". There certainly is nothing like unanimous agreement on these two things among scientists. As long as there is serious disagreement and stated objections to your assertions, you must concede that these are not facts, as you allege, but merely your own opinions.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"here certainly is nothing like unanimous agreement on these two things among scientists."

95% plus agreement. That's as unanimous as anything is going to get in science.

"As long as there is serious disagreement and stated objections to your assertions, you must concede that these are not facts, as you allege, but merely your own opinions."

There is no serious disagreement about the fossil record containing many many transitionals or that the genetic evidence overwhelmingly points to common descent.

[ahayes]

LOL! Please don't tell me what I can and cannot express confidence in when you are so obviously undereducated in this area. I would say biologists and paleontologists are unanimous that fossil transitional species have been found. Geneticists are unanimous that through evolution several polyploidy events and gene duplications have occurred which allowed spectacular new variations to arise. Geneticists are unanimous that the mechanisms for these changes have been observed in the present. I'm afraid it is simply your own opinion that these things are so hazily uncertain.