I'm going to bring this broomstick just to further demonstrate that you are a liar to claim that evidence means anything to you.
"One of the largest mysteries remaining in evolutionary biology is exactly how one species can gradually diverge into two," Irwin says. "And I'm sure that Darwin would be pleased at what we've found, because he always lacked the evidence that a species could change gradually as its members diverged and became isolated from each other. But now we have that evidence."
But most importantly, evidence of speciation does nothing to advance the claim of universal common ancestry. Speciation is fully compatible with the claim that multiple lineages were created independently and endowed with a degree of genetic adaptability. The fact one species can give rise to another similar species does not mean there are no limits to the process, that a bacterium can give rise to a human. (emphasis added) On the contrary, the experimental data cited previously suggests the opposite.
One need not be a creationist to question the extrapolation from speciation to universal common ancestry. As Brand notes, “Some scientists are beginning to doubt that the microevolutionary process extrapolated over time is adequate to produce more significant changes. They suggest that larger scale evolution must involve a different mechanism than microevolution and that it happens rapidly. (Ridley 1993, p. 523-525).” (Brand, 120.)