You could try to be specific about this by answering a few questions:
Here's some more:
Species have a bad habit of going extinct. Why is this, if evolution is true? Why don't they just "evolve" into something that keeps them truckin'?
What's with that little "chaos theory?" Has that now been disproven? Thanks, Happy Kwanza!
You forgot one in your list. How the heck does a redwood tree get water from the ground to its limbs nearly 300 feet up? The theory of evolution explains so very, very little.
Asked and answered a number of times on this thread.
Where did the water for the global flood come from and where did it go, and how are the scientific calculations on this subject "not scientific"?
The historic event as related in the Bible states that there was a Canopy above the atmosphere - possibly ice but water at the very least in one form or another as it references the waters above the heavens and the heavens are the sky or atmosphere. The Bible also tells of a cache' of water stored beneath the crust which broke open. After the flood, scripture says the see floor sunk in places and mountains were raised up. Afterward, only 3% of landmass was liveable, roughly which is the way it remains today. I find nothing in the story that isn't supportable in the fossil record.
With a canopy, ultraviolet light would be filtered. Oxygen levels were likely higher which is spoken to in samples of atmosphere captured in air bubbles in amber - showing upward of 35% oxygen. As far as I know, evolution can't account for this. Things are supposed to be getting better, not worse - which begs the question of why one finds such things as 60 foot cat tails (the plant) in the fossil record. They cannot and do not get that big on their own now; but, interestingly, saturating plants with an oxygen rich environment of 32%+ oxygen makes plants grow really big. It is also found that the affects of this on humans increases response of the body's defenses. Canopies are not unknown to the other planets, and I'd imagine if Mars follows suit with Earth, the place to find water there is below the crust. A way to test it here is to test water supplies beneath mountains for their saline level and compare it to modern oceanic levels. It's been done and the saline content is much higher under mountains and in underground stores found elsewhere - which should be no surprise to you if you have bothered to listen to any of your major opponents.
What exactly is a species, and how is science wrong in defining species?
Did science care what anyone else thought about this when they defined them originally. No. The reason you ask is to try and make a case that while Science's notion of it is flawed, nobody else has tried redefining it which isn't true. It is rejected on the basis that every creationist has a different answer. Which isn't entirely true. But to answer it directly, a species is a group of animals that under normal circumstances can interbreed. Example - dogs would include anything from Siberian Huskies to coyotes, wolves etc. Science has different defined species for different types of dogs if I'm not mistaken, yet they are all dogs and can interbreed. Cats cannot breed with dogs and are thusly a different species and always have been since they were created. Not difficult to understand. We just draw the boundaries in obvious places.
What is the biological barrier preventing variation from becoming speciation, and exactly how does this barrier function?
It's generally called DNA and RNA and the full system which governs cell reproduction. The system has multiple redundant backup systems to maintain integrity within a body and while mutations may exist within a creature, you don't observe individual mutations being passed on generationally to effect the population as a whole in any manner, to say nothing of a beneficial one. The barrier you seek you've already found and known about for some time. It's just inconvenient to dwell upon.
Does selection occur ever? Has it been observed? If so, where does the information come from that makes selection work?
Sure selection occurs. That's life - period. And absent morality, selection takes on some pretty grim forms. That doesn't do anything for your theory; so, I'm not real sure why you bother asking it when you know it doesn't.
How does the growth of a fertilized egg occur within the confines of the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
The system has the capacity to put energy to use for the purposes of building itself up within the defined limits provided by DNA/RNA. Beyond that, it is fully subject to the law in that it proceeds toward an end - devolving and decaying over time till it's dust. It fulfills the expectation of the law by resorting to disorder ie dying at the end of a hopefully productive life. And I would again note that adding energy to a system is useless unless that system expects that energy and can put it to use. Absent that, the energy is destructive, not constructive.