Sure. Put a stake off Cape Cod, check back in a couple million years, and measure the drift with a tape measure. : )
"As for the existence of electrons, neutrons, protons, neutrinos, etc., we can formulate experiements to test theories about the existence of all of those."
And we do the same with evolution (although the hecklers invariably shout "microevolution" and "the experiment was designed").
I understood your objection to be the lack of eyewitnesses to long-durational speciation events, i.e., no one was there to "see" it, so there's no proof it happened. To the extent this is, in fact, your objection, it's groundless. There's a whole lot of science that is premised on inference from circumstantial evidence (and a whole lot of criminals in jail based on the same inferential process).
" Sure. Put a stake off Cape Cod, check back in a couple million years, and measure the drift with a tape measure. : )"
You are sorely confused. For example, the continental drift is measurable at about one inch per year for the Atlantic Ocean.
"I understood your objection to be the lack of eyewitnesses to long-durational speciation events, i.e., no one was there to "see" it, so there's no proof it happened."
The experiements that can be re-created show the classical scientific process -- these are duplicatable, verifiable, and falsifiable. Outside of these experiments Evolution can make suppositions but no real theoretical assertions. IOW, if someone claims that two animals have a common ancestor because of similarities, this is merely a supposition, not a statement of provable fact.
"To the extent this is, in fact, your objection, it's groundless. There's a whole lot of science that is premised on inference from circumstantial evidence (and a whole lot of criminals in jail based on the same inferential process)."
Interesting. I thought we were dealing with cold, hard, provable science. Now I realize by your admission that the Evos are not scientists, they are actually detectives. The rule of law has a much lower standard for declaring something as fact than science (at least science used to have a higher standard until it was co-opted). Law never requires proof which is repeatable and able to be falsified.