Speciation is not development of another kind of animal. A dachsund is still a dog. A mut is a dog, a wolf and coyote are still dogs. That is not evolution, it is diversity within a kind or species. And no, diversity is not evolution. Nor does it qualified as observed change from one kind of animal to another. On Ring species, no, you can't observe two species and an intermediate form. You can observe multiple species and posit that one is an intermediate. And that is a long standing problem - intermediat or transitional forms are not just lacking - they're entirely absent. In absence of actual transitions, your bunch has resorted to pointing to fully formed non - transitionals and trying to pass them off as transitionals in hopes that we'd all buy it. It's like arguing that everything evolved from a single celled critter because everything has the same amino acids and uses dna.. If they all weren't made of the same stuff, we couldn't eat anything but ourselves. And textbooks all use languages, so I suppose we should assume that a couple hundred copies of Shogun got together and produced The Eiger sanction, which then evolved into a watchtower manual and so on. No, a moron understands that isn't the way it works. But because biological systems are involved and some people don't want to be constrained in their behaviors, we have to listen to similar tripe in explaining living systems. We reject it. And you have to produce actual transitions, not something you want to pass off as transitions because you find it convenient to label it as such and then shift burden to the other side to prove otherwise - also not scientific, much less proper logical argumentation.
You've offered nothing that is proof for anything propping up evolution. Variation within kinds of animals does happen; but, that doesn't prove your case, it rather proves ours, because there are limits that are well defined.