There's plenty of evidence. When people can look at vestigal legs on a snake and still claim that it is not "proof" of evolution - then there is nothing that will ever prove it to them. What would your explanation of legs on a snake be??
I know someone who seriously believes the world is flat. All the photos of the earth from space will not convince him. To him they are simply optical illusions. I don't see much difference in him and those who look at evidence of evolution (like vestigal legs on a snake) and refuse to believe what they see, or explain it away with a lot of talk.
I suppose if God Almighty came down on a cloud of Glory and told creationists that He DID create evolution as a means of changing life forms - maybe THEN some of you would finally accept it, though I have my doubts.
Now I didn't say 'evidence', did I? I said *unique evidence*. Do you know the difference?
As for 'vestigal' organs, do you think that 'loss of function' is evidence *for* evolution? That's decline. Much more consistent w/ creation than evolution.
Any way to convince someone like you (who believes that loss of function = evolution) that 'evolution' isn't true?
Doesn't look like it.
You aren't bright enough to realize that your own examples are inconsistent w/ your beliefs.