Piece of evidence? Setting the expectation a bit low aren't we? How much evidence does it take to put a man to death in the electric chair? Enough to spell out the case beyond a shadow of a doubt that he did it, right. And that's what I think rises to the level required.
What would it take for you to believe God and believe in God. Seems a fair question. I think similar proof would be required. Given the millions of animals on the face of the planet, surely you would be able to find one living animal group that is observably in transition. It doesn't take millions of years to happen any more than it takes mere seconds. Fact is you don't know how much time it takes because it's never been witnessed. So, rather than using time as an excuse, go get us a species of animal that is incontravertably as a group in transition - growing wings, an extra set of legs, a speices of fish growing arms and legs.. Should be a pretty easy task. Given the odds and the billions of living critters out there, it should be observable somewhere on this planet.
I know, I know. Too obvious, huh. And you've built that into your theory to explain away why evolution isn't being seen now. Spare us the handwringing and show it to us in progress. Unlike God who doesn't just walk around down here to directly observe, you have an advantage of vast populations of animals and fish to draw from in the here and now. The only thing left is excuses. No excuses. Put up or shut up.
If we could scientifically prove the existence of God, he wouldn't be God, now would he?
Given the millions of animals on the face of the planet, surely you would be able to find one living animal group that is observably in transition.
Everthing alive on the planet today could be a transitional species. Problem is, we don't know exactly what they might be transitioning into, since we can't see into the future. However, some marine biologists think that Atlantic and Pacific Killer Whales are transitioning into different species. Similarly, the King Cheetah may be an evolving form of Cheetah.
" Piece of evidence? Setting the expectation a bit low aren't we? "
The transitional forms are a stumbling block for the evolutionists, they are just so wrapped up in their dogma that they can't even examine the lack of evidence.
For example, for transitional forms to be a valid point of discovery, you would expect to see two things:
1) transitional forms in transition (i.e., a new leg on a creature appears as a nub first on some fossils, then appears on successive fossils as a longer nub, and then longer, etc., until it appears in its "final" form)
2) each transitional appendage that is in transition has to be a beneficial mutation for EACH STAGE OF THE MUTATION
This is the logical demonstration which is missing from the transitional "evidence". Showing two very dissimilar animals which have a couple of common traits is not showing a transition.