It's the same kind of reasoning used to solve crimes. You see that something has happened. You discover means, motive and opportunity. You draw conclusions. From a God's eye perspective, you haven't proved anything. It's not the kind of proof required in mathematics. The events can't be re-run in a laboratory. But people are executed based on this kind of reasoning.
Okay, since you say that evolution can provide at least the same kind of proof as given in court, let's see the proof of macro-evolution from the above perspective which you claim already exists.
Okay, since you say that evolution can provide at least the same kind of proof as given in court, let's see the proof of macro-evolution from the above perspective which you claim already exists. The jury has been in for quite some time.
- There are some friends of O.J. who refuse to believe that DNA evidence proves anything -- who refuse to believe that enormous and improbable strings of nonfunctional DNA found in different species implies common ancestry.
- There are some friends of O.J. who don't believe in radioactive dating and believe that earth is less than four billion years old.
- There are friends of O.J. who don't believe that the continual finding of intermediate fossils implies the existence of intermediate species.
- There are friends of O.J. who believe it takes a huge number of mutations to produce a large an viable structural change in an organism, and who ignore recent laboratory experiments (reported in the current Scientific American) demonstrating that a change in just a few molecules on and existing gene can dramatically alter the body plan of a fruit fly.
So I guess we have a hung jury, and you win. Truth is on your side, just like it was on O.J.'s.