Given Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, what scientific evidence best supports evolution by natural selection?

) Natural selection, doesn't account for some of the kinds of variation that we see in species -- particularly non-adaptive traits -- but you'll notice that Darwin didn't claim that natural selection explained all traits, merely the adaptive ones. After Darwin, some biologists distorted the theory of natural selection into the doctrine of "strict adaptionism", in which every feature of every organism was held to be produced by natural selection (and thus some explanation of why the feature is adaptive was required.) But Darwin didn't say that all selection is natural (adaptive) selection -- only that natural selection is the source of some change, and can explain why adaptive change occurs. Modern biologists have proposed other mechanisms for change -- neutral selection, genetic drift, the "founder effect", etc. -- and Darwin himself thought that sexual selection could be important. None of these contradict the idea of natural selection; as additional mechanisms for genetic change over time, they augment it. more............. Evolution as such. This is the theory that the world is not constant or recently created nor perpetually cycling, but rather is steadily changing, and that organisms are transformed in time. Common descent. This is the theory that every group of organisms descended from a common ancestor, and that all groups of organisms, including animals, plants, and microorganisms, ultimately go back to a single origin of life on earth. Multiplication of species. This theory explains the origin of the enormous organic diversity. It postulates that species multiply, either by splitting into daughter species or by "budding", that is, by the establishment of geographically isloated founder populations that evolve into new species. Gradualism. According to this theory, evolutionary change takes place through the gradual change of populations and not by the sudden (saltational) production of new individuals that represent a new type. Natural selection. According to this theory, evolutionary change comes about throught the abundant production of genetic variation in every generation. The relatively few individuals who survive, owing to a particularly well-adapted combination of inheritable characters, give rise to the next generation.

there are many examples. A species of moths in a forest in England were white and gray and a small amount black. Ashes one day covered the trees and the white and gray moths became visible and were eaten by birds. the black moths lived on and made babies and now the entire species is almost completely black. the moths dieing btw is natural selection. the species changing its main color is evolution.

a series of fossils whuch shows progression between dirrevt forms of same species

There actually is no hard evidence. In order for natural selection to work, the rest of the population without the desired gene would have to die, or the gene will be reabsorbed into the gene pool. Mutations are a loss of information. No new information is ever added genetically. Example: You want all people to be 7 feet tall or more. You would have to kill off everyone under 7 feet tall, and then any who came along after that, below 7 feet tall also. This could not happen naturally. (In answer to Bob, above: The so-called evidence you referred to about the moths has since been proven to be propaganda. Dead moths were glued to the trees for the pictures that were put into text books).