I know this was posted quite some time ago…

but I just feel like adding something regarding the theory of evolution and your discussion about “theories”. I just read it all and I am quite… you may even say happy about it. It’s nice to see that there are more people than me that are actually willing to discuss such matter deeply and not in just a superficial way. Now let’s get going:

It’s about the leg-fins within dolphins and whales. Modern evolution says that those are mammals living in the sea, so dolphins and whales are descemdemts of mammals that used to live on land. In a historical timeline it would be

first life form -> some became sea animals -> some of them became land animals -> some of them went back to sea after a long period of time (many many generations of course) and ended up as whales and dolphins.

Now the theory of evolution also says that all mammals have basically the same structure, the only difference lies within the proportions and some minor details – because there first was a “proto-mammal-species” that all mammals decent of, but not reptiles or such. This means, for example, that monkeys and human have exactly the same amount of hairs. But as I said the proportions are different – most of the human hairs dont grow as fast or thick or much at all than the monkey ones. I mean look closely at any of your body parts, you’ll see it, you dont even need Wikipedia to look it up.

Another example would be how all mammals have the same amount of vertebras. Giraffes have the same amount of vertebras as rats or cats of humen. It’s only the size that’s different.

A mory obvious story is, for example, the head. The face structure is pretty much the same for all mammals. Eyes, nose, mouth, ears… Just the proportions are different. Elephants have giant ears, dogs really good noses, and so on…

Let’s get to your topic of discussion:
Another example is, before getting back to the whales and dolphins, that e.g. bats, though having wings, still have exactly the same skelleton structure (just like whales and dolphins and all the other mammals). They only have a giant hand and especially middle finger (I think its the middle finger), but really short arms, and the finger make up the wings.
And yet another example in that row is the whale/dophin fins, because whales and dolphins also have the information regarding “legs”, that is, the bones and muscle structure of a Mammal leg. However the proportions kept scaling down as they had less and less use for it. Those cripples that had minor legs than others of their species seemed to actually have gotten along better… So they lost them. Its not exactly that hard. And the proof is within the creatures themselfes, for they still carry whats left of the general mammals structue, even if its tiny or being absorbed.
It’s actually an extremely intensive argument for evolution, once you understand the background of it. I hope I made it a bit clearer (if there was an issue in the first place – it looked a bit like it was)

I know you probably hope I finish already or you’re not even reading anymore but I just want to make another point about the “theory” discussion above.
Scientifically, there are no facts but hypothesises and theories.
Thats important to note.

A Hypothesis is a thesis (which in turn is a statement of possible fact) that may or may not be true, and whose faith is yet to be determined by evaluation/testing.
A Theory once was a Hypothesis that has been proven to be true through testing. It can still be found wrong during new tests and that happened and still happens a lot. Let’s take the the Newton Theory of Motion as an example. It’s been proven incorrect by Einstein, but it’s not really incorrect within the scales it uses. It only becomes incorrect in the really large or really small areas. So it’s not right to keep calling it a theory further without making that comment, but you may still call it theory if you keep the assumption of certain speeds and sizes (those we deal with in everyday life). Otherwise this would now be considered a disproven hypothesis.

Einsteins theory of relativity, however, now currenty is a theory by all means because it explains every observation perfectly. And thats all a theory is, a model to explain oberservations.
Similarily Evoution can be thought of as a fact for the claims it makes in accordence to the evidence we have, however it is not to be ruled out, or actually it is to be expected, that there will continue to be a flow of new evidence that will contradict with parts of or show gaps in evolution, that then need to be observed and explained. However that evidence will not contradict the basis of evolution, but details of the currently most accepted theory. It’s highly, I mean extremely improbable – though not impossible – that new evidence will completely disprove evolution, the probably most tested and hence most proven Hypothesis the world has ever seen, by far.

And to finish, I want to say that ID is not a theory, because it doesn’t give us a testable hypothesis to begin with. It’s just a statement, a statement of a design by a God. Not testable, no theory. And far off being considered a fact if you ask me. It’s a belief, and someone tried to put it into pseudo-scientific forms to compete with science. Unfortunately, that worked out well.

Now it’s over. Thanks for reading. Cheers