As far as evidence for speciation, we rely upon fossil evidence and genetic evidence. We make anatomical comparisons and try to make hierarchical relationships based on that. Furthermore, in embryology, all vertebrates look almost exactly alike in the beginning stages of their growth. That means that there is some sort of relation - a similar minimal blueprint of sorts.
But as far as paleontology is concerned, it is a relatively new field of study. As far as transitional species go, every species is a transitional species. Unfortunately, out knowledge of the fossil record will always be incomplete. To complete the fossil record would require digging up the entire earth's crust and sifting through it. But to withold judgment of the fossil record based on its incompleteness is not going to work. At what point can we say we have enough information to make a judgment?
Fortunately for evolutionists, genetic analysis backs up the theory. Chimpanzees are our closest species relative, sharing 98% of our DNA. Can you seriously deny that chimpanzees are closer to us than other species, such as alligators? If you don't deny it, then that would mean speciation somehow took place. We didn't observe it, but we know it took place. We cannot observe the continents moving (actually, I suppose we can now thanks to our more highly advanced technology), but we know they have done so.
I assume you believe speciation took place. But how can you measure design? You can't. What are the criteria? I maintain measuring design is a subjective experience. To even want to look for evidence is a bad idea, akin to trying to read God's mind. The materialistic aspect of science is hard and complicated enough, I'll leave the metaphysics to others.
Wheat, cotton, chimeras, antibiotics, etc.etc etc. There is evidence of desing in biology.
How do you know it was designed?
A much more difficult question.
I would not deny that chimps are closer to us than other species. In fact, they are amazingly close. Other than the fact they may be ready at any time to rip my face and genitals off they are my brothers and sisters.
But to assume, just because of apparent nearness, we are some how descended from one another is a logical non-sequitur. We don't do that even with inanimate objects. Two automobiles - absolutlely a product of intelligent design - have been developed completely apart from corresponding relationships in substance and time. There is no compelling reason to take it as a given that nature would initiate/produce common descent in every case simply because there is an apparent likeness.
Interesting verbage. I would think blueprint is associated with a design.
Chimpanzees are our closest species relative, sharing 98% of our DNA. Can you seriously deny that chimpanzees are closer to us than other species, such as alligators? If you don't deny it, then that would mean speciation somehow took place.
How does the result -- chimpanzees sharing 98% of DNA -- prove anything about the process?
Maybe the Designer made everything from the same DNA toolbox, so things look similar from a DNA standpoint...
The challenge for EV, despite any difficulties, includes the challenge of transitional species. The whole idea is that a particular transitional was a successful adaptation that lived, breathed, roamed the earth for ages. Evidence against is an issue that simply needs to be accepted as detrimental to the EV case.
Remember that in determining the likelihood of a non-repeatable event we can only collect evidence. The evidence can include that which supports and that which counters.
Evidence For + Evidence Against = Level of Confidence
In terms of evidence that demonstrates that a particular item has been designed rather than randomly, naturalistically assembled, we can look at items which we know to have been designed and assembled and see what characteristics these designed items share.
Designed items have variously form, function, inter-relating parts, systems, inter-relating systems, non-random ordering of components, etc. A car, for example, has a form, a function, all the above... If the world were destroyed except for a car kept in a time capsule, a visiting intelligent life form could eventually determine that it was a product of intelligent design, no matter how primitive.
Life as we know it on earth shares these characteristics of other items we know to have been designed.
As Alamo-girl has carefully explained, the information systems within living organisms are so complex that they entirely defy randomness.