If evidence is found and verified in multiple ways, from which a generalization might be logically and reasonably made, those might have right to be called 'facts.'
Out of no primordial soup has life ever been shown to evolve. The most modern science knows of no way to foster its occurrence.
Darwin always cautioned that evolution was just a theory, but if facts be found that counter a theory, it should no longer be called a theory. It would be a "discredited hypothesis or set of hypotheses."
There is no evidence to conclude that we share a common ancestor with modern-day, tree-climbing primates. Those have 44 chromosomes where homo sapiens sapiens have 46. No offspring can be produced therefrom (absent an act of God). No mutation has otherwise been found where viable, fertile offspring can subsequently mate between creatures with differing numbers of chromosomes.
There are many such facts that basically blast Darwin's theory of evolution out of the water.
Furthermore, at least one Denisovan was able ~70,000 years ago to take time away from his hunting, grunting and gathering to create extraordinarily exquisite jewlery. The technology to make drill that was used to create it are akin to the Neolithic era, dozens of millennia later. The advanced brain function rivals activities only imagined 40,000+ years later.
At what leisure activities would one imagine the well-dressed Denisovan would choose these accessories? 