text: evolution? or one creator?   evidence for evolution: 1. vestigial structures. 2. microevolution can be observed in both a controlled laboratory setting and in nature. 3. the fossil record. 4. imperfect structures (the blind spot of the mammalian eye, for example). 5. developmental biology reflects evolutionary lineage. 6. genetic analysis shows similarities among species reflecting evolutionary origins. 7. homologous structures. 8. many cellular and biochemcial processes are conserved in a variety of species. 9. vestigical biochemical pathways (for example, pancreatic cells are light-sensitive even though they are located deep inside the body).  those are just a few off the top of my head. if you'd like to know more about any of them, just ask.  evidence for intelligent design: umm... the bible says so?  i think the choice is clear. it's not a question of "belief," but rather of rational thought, reasoning, and examination of evidence.   _______________ response to johnblessed01:  first, i did not state that each of the points taken own its own is irrefutable proof of evolution.  i said that each of those constitutes evidence that evolution occurs.  while no one point proves evolution, taken in combination the body of scientific evidence that supports evolution is quite strong.  now to address the individual arguments: 1. vestigial structures.  where did i saw that the human tail bone is the best example of a vestigial structure?  i'm not an expert on human anatomy, but i will not deny that the tail bone has a structural function in the human body.  one example of a vestigial structure in humans in the appendix.  it has no function.  removing it is harmful only in so far as any surgery is associated with certain risks (so i wouldn't have it removed just for fun, but it's because of the surgery not the absence of the appendix).  an appendix is found in several mammals.  in humans it is small and has no known function.  in rabbits and many other herbivours it is large and is used in the digestion of cellulose.  another example of a vestigial structure is the hip bones of snakes.  snakes evolved from quadrupeds, and some species still retain not on pelvises, but tiny protrutions of bone in a location that corresponds to the location of the legs in other quadrupeds.   2. microevolution can be observed in both a controlled laboratory setting and in nature.  i didn't say that microevolution proves macroevolution.  however, it does provide evidence that macroevolution may be possible.  on its own microevolution is not terribly compelling for the reasons johnblessed01 described.  however, taken in context of the other evidence for evolution, microevolution provides a mechanims by which macroevolution could occur.  on its own, it doesn't prove that macroevolution occurs, but it does suggest that it is possible.   3. the fossil record.  johnblessed01's response to this point demonstrated a lack of understanding of the processes involved in fossilization and the methods associated with reconstructing evolutionary history.  obviously the "geological column" is a simplification.  scientists can reconstruct a sequence of events based on the types of surrounding rocks (i'm not an expert in geology but a geologist could explain in great detail how different types of rocks form), carbond dating, and various other methods.  geologists can distinguish sedemntary layers formed rapidly by a volcano from layers formd by, for example, changing bodies of water and low-acting forces of nature.  but again, this is not the only method of dating fossiles.  the time scale under which fossilization takes place depends on the geological and environmental conditions.  these can be assessed based on the chemical composition of the fossile and the surrounding material, as well as other factors.  petrification can occur extremely rapidly in, say, a bog or a tar pit, but not at the bottom of