Sorry. I went out of town over the weekend, and just saw your post this morning.
Is it your contention that there are no theoretical mechanisms that have been offered to explain what might be considered the "fact" of evolution? Or are you simply challenging whether or not certain posters here can state these mechanisms?
That's it. Not "challenging" so much as simply asking - state it. The Theory of Evolution. People talk about it like it means something. State is succinctly, clearly, scientifically.
The problem is, I don't think it can be done. The question remains - is evolution science? There are a lot of scientists who are surely asking this. Science, and particularly technology, is a bottom-line test. When you get the gizmo set up, you find out whether it works. There's a lot of BS, particularly in the published papers, no doubt. But unlike econ, or philosophy, or dare I say, evolution, there's that testing, that backboard, that hard wall that tells you if you threw the ball high or low. I'd say it to economists, and sociologists, and evolutionists. How did the ball bounce? Did you bother? Did you try? Can the 'science' get in the way of even throwing it hard enough to hit?
I remember asking one time about the key formulas of evolution. If you get an evolutionist text, what algebra and calculus is presented to the academic? I got a lot of blank stares as it were.