“The evidence is nonexistent to creationists because they absolutely refuse to see it—for religious reasons. Evolutionary scientists have no problem seeing the huge amount of evidence that is out there, with more coming each year.”
To see what? It’s still a “theory” and will remain ever so. If this evidence you site were all that convincing it would be scientific fact which it most decidedly isn’t! So, while Darwinists want Christians to get off their high horses about an unprovable God. (Their words) Darwinists should get off their high horse about an unprovable theory.
Your use of the terms "prove," scientific fact," and "theory" are incorrect. Scientists do not use them in the manner you are suggesting.
I have a long list of definitions on my FR homepage, but in brief:
No theory is ever proved in science, so calling the theory of evolution an "unproved theory" says more about your understanding of science than about the theory of evolution.
"Scientific facts" are explained by theories. Science works with both facts and theories. Facts by themselves lack context and meaning; a usable theory helps to explain those facts. A good theory explains existing and newly discovered facts, and also allows predictions to be made. The theory of evolution is one of the best supported theories in science.