Ah, the less reputable AIG.

If you don't believe in evolution then no one on an internet message board is going to convince you. There is far too much evidence to simply sum up into some sort of 'defining proof'. There is no one one thing which proves the theory, only a stack of palaeontological and biological evidence that makes it extremely hard to deny for any rational person (at least in the context of being the most probable theory explaining species diversification that we know of). If you're serious about learning more about it then you really have to do your own research. I would recomend reading this book

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vertebrate-Palaeontology-Michael-J-Benton/dp/0632056371/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255034852&sr=8-1

It's from a professor of palaeontology at Bristol University and it is one of the most comprehensive pieces of literature out there covering everything about the fossil record and it adresses many of the issues people have raised on here. Even better is that it is very easy to read and follow if you're new to the subject.

I'd ask you to elaborate, but I won't...

you really believe the tail bone is vestigial? you need your tailbone, bro, trust me. lol.

as far as the appendix goes, doesnt the appendix have something to do with immunity to diseases? can somebody elaborate on this?

thank you, i will read that.

i do like learning about this sort of stuff, and i have done plenty of studying on the subject, but i like to discuss things that i am learning with other people. i think it is a good discussion to be had, because i am still somewhat of a skeptic on the whole evolution thing. i just want to see what you guys think.

To be vestigial it doesn't have to be useless, merely to have lost its original purpose.

But in any case, truly useless things in humans include the muscles in our ears, goose bumps and the remains of a third eyelid.

1) Life Devoping from Matter

Lipids, due to their chemical makeup, tend to attract each other at their heads and tales (while the head and tale repel each other). Lipids form sphere like structures naturally.  Its thought that lipids served as the first cell wall. RNA, which consists of basic organic molecules and could have formed randomly, is able to self replicate itself.

The beginning of life could have very well been a RNA strand inside a lipid. When the lipid sphere gets too big, it becomes unstable and breaks into smaller parts, with some of the RNA staying inside spheres. If the RNA mutated to code for lipid production, you have your first reproducing proto cell. As the RNA keeps mutating and stays inside its lipid structure, the RNA continues to add more and more jobs until 'life' as we now it begins.

2) Changes Within a Species

Its good that you accept this fact.  However, you draw an innacurate line between small changes and big changes.  DNA mutation happen all the time, and over time small changes turn into big ones.  This is a long and difficult process, which is why mammals have kept four legs for hundreds of millions of years (minus whales, ofcourse, who have fins that developed from front legs and back legs that became useless).

3) Changes From One Species to Another

There is little difference between the DNA of different species, man and ape have 98% similar DNA.  What creates one species from another is the continued changes in DNA from mutations until a point is reached where the DNA and/or mating between species is impossible.  A horse and a donkey are a great example of this.  Horses and donkeys share a common ancestor and are alike enough so that you can breed the two different species and create a mule, but that mule is infertile.  Because the offspring is infertile, horses and donkeys are seperated by a barrier that prevents them from swapping DNA, and the two species will continue to evolve to the point to where all mating impossible.

where do you suspect goose bumps and a third eyelid are traced back to?

No problem. It's clear from your posts that you know more about the subject than I assumed from your initial question but it is very difficult to debate this sort of topic on a message board in such a broad sense (the same goes for most scientific topics of public interest such as climate change) as there is too much information to just sum up. Evolution is not perfect but if you read scientific journals/books and not just media reports (who exagerate the significance of every new fossil find) you should see it's a very good working theory. The book is definately worth a read if you can find a copy in your library (it's quite expensive to buy) as it's as interesting as it is informative. I've got a copy myself so would be happy to debate anything you find of interest should you read it.

yea my original post seems kind of like it is on the offensive, sorry. lol. i do take that stance in a sense because people get more passionate about it and engage in the topic more. basically i just wanted to know what people think the biggest support for evolution is. some say the fossil record, but i really just fail to see how finding bones that are supposedly millions of years old and then lining them up  is proof of evolution. it seems that the link you provided me will make an attempt to answer that question.

my problem is that im poor. =[ i still haven't even read the origin of species, which is something i really want to do as well.