Evolution of Species
Can evolution account for a "jump" to an entirely new kind of animal? Observable natural selection does not indicate this.
Natural selection is observed, like Darwin's notes about the length of finch beaks changing, but the finches remain finches. The genetic code resulting in change was there in the parent birds. It does not provide any evidence that they had a common ancestor that was a dinosaur! This kind of change (or microevolution) always involves sorting and loss of genetic information, not creation of new information.
Darwin concluded in the Origin of the Species (p245-278, 1859) "Finally, then, the facts briefly given in this chapter do not seem to me opposed to, but even rather to support the view, that there is no fundamental distinction between species and varieties."
We now know that different "kinds" cannot interbreed and form fertile offspring, there is distinction, which is consistent with the Bible's description of "like begats like".
The Bible refers to vegetation and animals reproducing "according to their kinds" (Genesis 1:11-24). A "kind" is somewhere between a family and a species.
God is a creator; J R R Tolkien, author of Lord of the Rings, said that mankind is a "sub- creator". We're made in God's image, we create art, music, poetry - what is the purpose within the survival of the fittest evolution model? A painting is evidence of a painter - creation is evidence of a Creator.

Some monkeys are quite cute, but do you really think that they are your ancestors?

Further reading:
graphic