Post some scientific evidence that "disproves" evolution.
[Did you know that using the word disproves or proof pretty much assures you of not being taken seriously by scientists? It shows a complete ignorance of scientific method.]
I've posted the thing a bout fruit flies here before and I haven't seen a rational argument proposed against it.
That one to me suffices by itself, being an absolute laboratory test of the entire theory (of evolution), but there're lots of others.
There are animals and animal features which could not plausibly evolve, since they are massively complex and would be useless in anything but the finished stage. The bombardier beetle is one such; baleen is another; wings are another.
Or take snakes for instance. The first step in evolving into snakehood would be being born/mutated as a quadraplegic and, starting from there, you'd have to somehow or other learn how to slither and kill prey in the fifteen minutes you'd have before the first predator which came along ate YOU.
I mean, none of this crap works from a standpoint of simple logic.