The "facts" that I reference are what lead to the conclusion of evolution. There's the "FACT" of a broken Vitamin C identical in multiple species of primates, suggesting that the gene became "broken" in a common ancestor that split off into the various primate species that carry the gene (including homo sapiens); for contrast, guinea pigs also have a broken vitamin C synthesis gene that is completely different than the one found in primates.
Actually the fact that humans, primates and a few other animals have broken Vitamin C mechanism is itself a proof of evolution. In mammals that produce their own Vitamin C; the Vitamin C molecule is formed from the glucose molecule; four enzymes are required to do the conversion, humans and apes have the first three, having lost the fourth in our evolutionary past.
If God the Intelligent Designer decided that humans and a few other animals did not need to produce their own Vitamin C, why put in the first three enzymes...which do us no good? How do CreationistsIntelligent Design Theorists explain that?
The evolutionary explanation is that prehuman ancestors had the complete ability to produce Vitamin C but with a fruit and leafy diet rich in Vitamin C, a mutation that lost them the ability to produce their own Vitamin C did not pose a reproductive disadvantage to its possessors, (and may have given an advantage).
However, when humans migrated out of Africa to colder climes this lack has caused hardship to humans as they had to adopt a Vitamin C poor diet. If Mankind is God's the Intelligent Desigener's special creation; why didn't He It foresee that we would need that fourth enzyme, and conserve it for us?
It is SO past time for an INTELLIGENT debate on this issue. Why is it so hard to accept the idea that we just don't know for SURE how life began? And do those who refuse to accept anything but Darwinian evolution truly believe that any proof of evolution- if there should ever BE any- somehow "rains on the Christian parade"? I certainly hate to disabuse any "true believers" in the crowd (no I don't), but evolution as a implement of God is also quite acceptable to those who live in faith.
I do not believe that there is anything but an agenda at work in any rejection of ID...
See the following for some insight:
Dan Peterson, "What's the Big Deal About Intelligent Design". American Spectator, Dec.2005-Jan.2006.
http://www.discovery.org/csc/topQuestions.php
http://actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html
The fight over this issue, by the evolutionists, has only ONE purpose- and it ain't about "science".
We share certain DNA molecules with every other plant and animal on the planet...I don't see how Vit C is somehow more indicative than any others you might name. I cannot argue on this basis- I am a historian, not an expert in DNA science. I have yet to see how the fact that I share DNA with kitties and daisies has offered ANY proof of evolution and far greater experts than any posting here don't see it either.