Evolution and Speciation

What is the difference between an hypothesis, a theory and a fact? I have heard that evolution is a fact. Is that true?
What is the most compelling evidence for molecules-to-man evolution?
But isn't it true that the real experts, the developmental biologists who know that Haeckel is no fraud, seldom write or edit textbooks, so their voices are seldom heard?
What about the peppered moths? Don't they illustrate evolution?
Are there intermediate fossils that bridge the gaps between major forms, and thus support the evolutionary scenario?
The eye is surely one of the most intricate organs of the body. Yet Richard Dawkins and others have suggested the eye was poorly designed. What do you think?
How can Creationists maintain that there are no biological examples demonstrating an increase in the information content of a gene?
Why can't someone who has assembled 1/2 of a jigsaw puzzle, revealing a partial but obvious picture of mountains and a lake, call it such a picture without having to reveal the other half of the puzzle? And even if a few pieces are missing or don't fit? The structure of evidence for evolution is far beyond that threshold.
Richard Dawkins, in his book "The Blind Watchmaker", uses an analogy to illustrate how what he calls "cumulative selection" works. In this illustration he uses a computer to generate a phrase "METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL" Doesn't this demonstrate that evolution can produce information easily?
I have heard that cladistic analysis has proved evolution by showing the evolutionary relatedness of organisms. Is this true?
Are there any examples where speciation has been observed in action?
If evolution is such a bankrupt idea, why are there still so many scientists and other intellectuals that subscribe to it?
What do statements made by prominent scientists that "Evolution is a fact" or "Evolution is proven" mean?
What motivates evolutionists who actively promote evolutionary thinking and rabidly oppose Creation?
Good scientific theories make predictions that can be tested. Does evolution make predictions that can be tested?
Can natural selection coupled with random mutation ever account for the variety of living organisms we see on the earth?
Is there evidence that new species of animal are forming now?
An evolutionist recently stated that believing in creation is like believing in the flat earth theory. What about that?
I have been told that although evolution appearst to violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics ["order decreases"] this is not true because the universe is an open system and the second law only applies to closed systems. What do you say?
What were Darwin's motives in writing "Origin" ?
Dawkins recently freely admitted that belief in God was a reasonable premise. He said "The deist god would be one that I think it would be [pause] one could make a reasonably respectable case for that. Not a case that I would accept, but I think it is a serious discussion that we could have." He later tried to distance hismelf from those remarks. Why?
How is it possible that intelligent scientists like Richard Dawkins and others cannot see the obvious evidence for design and a Designer in living systems?