Which of the 3 seperates tenants of evolution would you like to debate. 1) Natural Selection 2) Micro Evolution or 3) Macro Evolution?
I'd actually approach this differently. Evolution only posits the change within kinds.As I said, the evidence that one "kind" (whatever that is) can change into another is genetic data, which shows that one kind has changed into another. If there were some other way to explain the data, the evidence would be less persuasive, but no one has offered an alternative.
A eukaryote (has a nucleus) might develop a true multicellular colony organism, but it's still a eukaryote.
A multicellular organism might develop bilateral symmetry, but it's a multicellular eukaryote.
A bilaterally symmetrical multicellular eukaryote might develop a hollow nerve cord (vertebrate) but it's still a A bilaterally symmetrical multicellular eukaryote
a vertebrate bilaterally symmetrical multicellular eukaryote might develop a calcified internal skeleton, but it's still, well, you get the picture.
Go through that same thing with:
a jaw
4 limbs
lungs
amniotic eggs
hair
opposable thumbs
bipedal locomotion
etc.
Kind after kind describes evolution just fine. In a nested hierarchy, each thing is just variation within the parent groups.
Upvote
0