[Greg F]

So there is millions of years of evidence to work with. Still, as far as I know, no proof of any species evolving into another species based on any evidence. I’m asking honestly though if there is a claim that there is proof one species evolving into another, I have just read that there is none . . . that the “missing link” is still missing . . . for every species on the planet.

[MrB]

Not only are the “missing links” still missing,

but where are the millions of minute “mistakes” that didn’t make it?

And how about the impossible odds of the flagellum, requiring 17 simultaneous mutatations, none of which, in any other combination other than the exact one that we see today, could be of any evolutionary benefit?

[Non-Sequitur]

Still, as far as I know, no proof of any species evolving into another species based on any evidence. I’m asking honestly though if there is a claim that there is proof one species evolving into another, I have just read that there is none . . . that the “missing link” is still missing . . . for every species on the planet.

Depends on what you consider proof. Paleoanthropologists believe that they have tracked the evolution of man from Homo Habilis through Homo Erectus to Homo Heidelbergensis and Homo Neanderthalensis on to Homo Sapien. And they've published their evidence to support their hypothesis. As for the evolution of life through amphibian to reptile to bird and mammal, scientists have identified hundreds of what they believe are transitional fossils indicating that progression. You may not accept their evidence as accurate but that's a far cry from saying no evidence exists at all.

[Cedric]

C’mon, Greg, be reasonable. You can’t expect just a few million of the self-described smartest people in the world, working full time for a scant 150 years to produce the confirmatory fossil record Darwin promised. Be patient, dude.