You miss the point, Bobby. You evolutionist guys think a reptile with feathers is proof that birds evolved from reptiles, when it could just as well mean nature tried feathers out on more than one kind of critter and the one it worked on is the one that survived.
By your logic you can dismiss anything by saying "well, it's just a coincidence." If we only had a few bits of evidence, maybe it could just be a coincidence. But we have a lot, and it all points in the same direction.
Take your exmple of feathered dinosaurs. It has long been thought that birds are the descendents of dinosaurs, because they have much in common. Birds appear in the fossil record during the time of the dinosaurs. Birds are known to be closely related to reptiles from their genetics. There are birdlike dinosaurs that closely predate true birds. Then we find, right in the middle of the timeline, small extremely birdlike dinosaurs that have feathers.
Sure - it could just be a total coincidence. But it isn't likely.
That's what I mean by "what you accept as proof." There are plenty of other examples. You guys count change in allele frequency as proof of speciation, but that doesn't persuade me or many others, including many with PhD's in biology.
That is a pretty basic definition of what evolution is, but it isn't proof. We do have a lot of evidence, and the evidence comes from many different directions. See above and below.
As far as PhDs in bio who are skeptics of the ToE, there are very, very few. And those who are also are virtually always - by coincidence? - extremely religious, typically fundamentalists who magically begin to see that "it's all a lie" right after their conversions. Then again every scientific discipline has its skeptics. There are a few physics PhDs out there who disagree with generally agreed upon ideas in that field as well. That doesn't mean that the foundation of physics is likely to be wrong.
Set the bar low enough on what you'll accept as proof, and you can prove pert near anything.
But the bar for evidence in the field is actually very high, because of the resistance to the idea of evolution. Despite what you seem to believe evolution isn't just some idle speculation. We could make any number of observations that are totally incompatible with the ToE - but we keep not making them. How can this be?
But when one of your main men (Dawkins) outright lies about his subject, I'd say your side of the argument is seriously grasping at straws.
You still haven't explained exactly what he supposedly lied about. Despite his caustic attitude Dawkins is still generally well-respected.
However, speaking of liars - if a liar who lies about a given subject means the subject they defend might be false - there are many lying creationists out there. How about "Mr" Kent Hovind, to take perhaps the most obvious example?
I know you've seen this before, but bear with me: it's the famous page from talkorigins, "29+ Evidences for Macroevolution."
<TABLE class=outline cellPadding=5 summary="" border=1><TBODY><TR class=outline><TD class=outline33>Introduction (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html#intro)
Universal Common Descent Defined (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html#common_descent)
Evidence for Common Descent is Independent of Mechanism (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html#theorytobetested)
What Counts as Scientific Evidence (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html#evidence)
Other Explanations for the Biology (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html#alternate_explanations)
How to Cite This Document (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/default.html#citing) Scientific Evidence and the Scientific Method (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/sciproof.html)
Phylogenetics introduction (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html)
Figure 1: A consensus universal phylogeny (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html#fig1)
Cladistics and phylogenetic reconstruction (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html#phylogenetics)
Maximum parsimony (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html#parsimony)
Maximum likelihood (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html#likelihood)
Distance matrix methods (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html#distance)
Statistical support for phylogenies (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html#reliability)
Does phylogenetic inference find correct trees? (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html#correct)
Caveats with determining phylogenetic trees (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/phylo.html#caveats) </TD><TD class=outline33>Part I. A unique, historical phylogenetic tree (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html)
Unity of life (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#fundamental_unity)
Nested hierarchies (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#nested_hierarchy)
Convergence of independent phylogenies (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#independent_convergence)
Statistics of incongruent phylogenies (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/incongruent.html)
Transitional forms (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates)
Reptile-birds (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates_ex1)
Reptile-mammals (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates_ex2)
Ape-humans (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates_ex3)
Legged whales (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates_ex4)
Legged seacows (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates_ex4)
Chronology of common ancestors (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#chronology) </TD><TD class=outline33>Part 2. Past history (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html)
Anatomical vestiges (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#morphological_vestiges)
Atavisms (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#atavisms)
Whales with hindlimbs (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#atavisms_ex1)
Humans tails (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#atavisms_ex2)
Molecular vestiges (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#molecular_vestiges)
Ontogeny and developmental biology (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#ontogeny)
Mammalian ear bones, reptilian jaws (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#ontogeny_ex1)
Pharyngeal pouches, branchial arches (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#ontogeny_ex2)
Snake embryos with legs (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#ontogeny_ex3)
Embryonic human tail (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#ontogeny_ex4)
Marsupial eggshell and caruncle (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#ontogeny_ex5) <!--
chicken teeth (http://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/section2.html#ontogeny_ex6)-->
Present biogeography (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#present_biogeography)
Past biogeography (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#past_biogeography)
Marsupials (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#past_biogeography_ex1)
Horses (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#past_biogeography_ex2)
Apes and humans (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#past_biogeography_ex3) </TD></TR><TR class=outline><TD class=outline33>Part 3. Evolutionary opportunism (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section3.html)
Anatomical parahomology (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section3.html#morphological_parahomology)
Molecular parahomology (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section3.html#molecular_parahomology)
Anatomical convergence (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section3.html#morphological_analogy)
Molecular convergence (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section3.html#molecular_analogy)
Anatomical suboptimal function (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section3.html#morphological_inefficiency)
Molecular suboptimal function (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section3.html#molecular_inefficiency) </TD><TD class=outline33>Part 4. Molecular evidence (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html)
Protein functional redundancy (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#protein_redundancy)
DNA functional redundancy (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#DNA_redundancy)
Transposons (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#transposons)
Redundant pseudogenes (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#pseudogenes)
Endogenous retroviruses (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#retroviruses) </TD><TD class=outline33>Part 5. Change (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html)
Genetic (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html#genetic_change)
Morphological (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html#morphological_change)
Functional (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html#functional_change)
The strange past (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html#strange_past)
Stages of speciation (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html#speciation_stages)
Speciation events (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html#speciations)
Morphological rates (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html#morphological_rates)
Genetic rates (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html#genetic_rates) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
That's an enormous amount of evidence, and it comes from different fields - geentics, paleontology and so on. Look at the pages on endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and pseudogenes. Those are my personal favorites as far as evidence goes. They are, respectively, old "fossilized" viruses in our DNA and "fossils" of formerly working genes. Beyond the fact that they are incompatible with any kind of design, they are excellent evidence for common descent. ERVs can be found in many lineages.
Look at this:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/images/retrovirus.gif
Figure 4.4.1. Human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) insertions in identical chromosomal locations in various primates (Reprinted from Lebedev et al. 2000, © 2000, with permission from Elsevier Science).
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#retroviruses
As you go up the "family tree," you see that we begin to have more and more ERVs in common with other primates. Therefore, after each split in the lineage the common ancestors were sometimes infected with viruses that occasionally infected the germ cells. After the orangutans branched off, the ancestor of humans, chimps and gorillas was infected by several viruses. The same thing happened after gorillas split from the chimp/human common ancestor, and again after that line split. If evolution didn't happen, there'd be no reason for this pattern of ERVs.
The same goes for pseudogenes. Once a gene is "broken," there is no selective pressure to keep it free of deleterious mutations. Therefore they begin to accumulate, and mutation rates are pretty well known. So if two species share a certain pseudogene, you can look at the mutations they share and those that are new in each species (in the certain pseudogene). Then you can calculate when the species diverged, i.e. when they shared a common ancestor. Typically these dates match very well with the dates given by examining the fossils of the respective species.
Could this be a coincidence? I suppose, though it's incredibly unlikely. But these sorts of observations are exactly what the ToE predicts.