"That prediction has been supported by fossil and genetic evidence (Ingman et al. 2000)."
Ah, yes... where did caucasians come in? How on earth did those Chinese get way over there before they invented/discovered the wheel?
Saying we're all from africa is laughable.
"* Theory predicted that organisms in heterogeneous and rapidly changing environments should have higher mutation rates. This has been found in the case of bacteria infecting the lungs of chronic cystic fibrosis patients (Oliver et al. 2000)."
"What is 'adaptation'?" Correct for 200.
"* Predator-prey dynamics are altered in predictable ways by evolution of the prey (Yoshida et al. 2003)."
If the predator "evolves" it stops being the same predator. Same with the prey. Again, "What is 'adaptation'?"
"* Ernst Mayr predicted in 1954 that speciation should be accompanied with faster genetic evolution. A phylogenetic analysis has supported this prediction (Webster et al. 2003)."
Yet we still hold no "Species A-> Species B" examples as observation.
"* Several authors predicted characteristics of the ancestor of craniates. On the basis of a detailed study, they found the fossil Haikouella "fit these predictions closely" (Mallatt and Chen 2003)."
So they found a dead lizard (sans-bones) in a valley. Was this searching of the valley directed by the authors? Why did these Haikuoella die out? Where are there ancestors?
Why does Chen argue the Haikuoella could be in fact a craniate, and not an ancestor there-of?
"* Evolution predicts that different sets of character data should still give the same phylogenetic trees. This has been confirmed informally myriad times and quantitatively, with different protein sequences, by Penny et al. (1982). "
Ah, using trees to explain that things that look alike are built alike. This does not make them related. It makes the similar.
Nothing new here I'm afraid.
"*A new species of mosquito, Culex molestus, isolated in London's Underground, has speciated from Culex pipiens (Byrne and Nichols 1999; Nuttall 1998)."
A new species... but it can still mate with the old one. ::yawn:: are you even trying? It's named for it's behavior, in both cases. They can mate with each other. They are the same, excepting habit. May as well tell me about the finches some more.
"* Helacyton gartleri is the HeLa cell culture, which evolved from a human cervical carcinoma in 1951. The culture grows indefinitely and has become widespread (Van Valen and Maiorana 1991)."
The closest you got to legit. A virus introduced its own DNA into her cells. This mutation was not an "evolution" of a human, but the immortality of her compromised cells. Thats like saying "AIDs contractors have evolved into NOT having an immune system."
Though interesting, this story is not "earth breaking"
"* Several new species of plants have arisen via polyploidy (when the chromosome count multiplies by two or more) (de Wet 1971). One example is Primula kewensis (Newton and Pellew 1929). "
I believe I read that one long ago. Didn't they have to, in fact, combine two different species to make a new one? (I will admit, it was then able to reproduce, which is a plus... but it still required TWO to get ONE. This wasn't a case of one species evolving.)
Keep trying. I think I feel an extra eye coming on... But the deal is still a thumb, so I guess you can keep going.
And disputed by plenty of other experts... As to the new species thing, have any of your examples been repeated in a lab or are they just observations thus not re-creatable?