29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent, Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ, etc. etc.
All the evidence is that such transformations are impossible:
"All" the evidence, eh? Odd, there are several papers in each issue of the Journal of Molecular Evolution which contradict your claim, not to mention dozens of other scientific journals.
Are you sure you've been keeping up with the field?
1. genetics shows how utterly impossible it is for a new trait to spread.
You seem to have forgotten to explain how, or provide any support for your amazing claim.
2. DNA shows how utterly impossible it is for a new gene, a new functio, a new ability to arise.
You seem to have forgotten to explain how, or provide any support for your amazing claim.
3. the interconnectedness of life shows how impossible it is for anything new to become an integral part of the rest.
You seem to have forgotten to explain how, or provide any support for your amazing claim.
4. the regulation of functions shows that new abilities cannot arise gradually because unless regulated they will be not just harmful but deadly.
You seem to have forgotten to explain how, or provide any support for your amazing claim.
So your statement is completely false scientifically.
Don't make wild claims you can't support.
Let's see the paper. Enough of this 'unseen evidence'. Let's see the specifics of a species having been observed transforming itself into another species. Just one article, is that too much to ask? Just some real facts, scientifically verified, can't you do that after 150 years of evolutionist theory.
As to 29 evidences, post the strongest bit of evidence right here and I will show it is no evidence at all. This is a challenge to you to start using specifics instead of making vague claims. I know you will not be up to the task and just give us more rhetoric and more excuses.