“Accepting the theory of evolution is not a matter of “belief,” it’s a matter of looking at the evidence.”
I think I’ve been very clear. There is no widespread evolution and there is not evidence of it. I have also explained I don’t know everything there is to know about it, but what I do know is that there is little to no current evidence of any past species to species change. Let’s discount the fossil record. There is not sufficient evidence of species evolving into another species among the current surviving species groups. You would have to believe there are scores of animals and mutations of animals hiding in plain view to strain the imagination to that point. The faith comes in when you can look at a man and a monkey, see absolutely no intermediate species and assume evolution. Call it what you will, but that is faith.
Because you post an example on a minute scale of what is being called evolution you expect me to completely abandon reason? Again, I appreciate the heck out of the example and the discussion, but I would need more proof based on the tremendous implications of evolution. People who wish to believe need far less proof. That is the definition of faith.
You continue to claim there is no evidence after I gave you the evidence you originally asked for, of one species becoming two different species, so yes, there is evidence.
I have also explained I don’t know everything there is to know about it,
If you don’t know enough about it, then how can you assert that the theory of evolution is wrong? It sounds like you have made your decision on other grounds than the actual evidence.
but what I do know is that there is little to no current evidence of any past species to species change.
I have already given you current evidence of species change.
Let’s discount the fossil record.
No, I won’t “discount the fossil record,” as it’s powerful evidence supporting the theory of evolution. Why do you want to discount good evidence?