It must be said: your post above is reasonable and makes some sense, regardless of you being tired :-)
The process of evolution as an explanation for the observed facts (the facts that cofty presents in his series of posts) might be subject to change and revision.
Highly theoretically speaking it might even be that some day so many other facts come to light that a completely new theory to explain all observed facts is accepted. That is how the scientific process works.
However, there are so ridiculous many observed facts that all support the theory of evolution that it is highly unlikely (as in virtually impossible) that it is wrong. Hence that scientists, who are cautious doubters by nature and profession, dare to label the theory a fact.
Are there any observed facts that contradict the theory of evolution? If they haven't been found by now, what is the chance they will be found in future?
On the other hand, we have the folks that say 'God did it'.
Those that claim 6 literal creation days have to explain away a massive amount of contradicting evidence by uttering a confused non-explanation: 'it's a miracle, God did it anyway'.
Those that claim some sort of intelligent design or guided evolution have (while their ideas cannot be tested and thus can't be disproved) zero, nada, nil evidence to support their claims either.
So while I get the distinction you make between fact and theory, there is no practical application for that difference when speaking about evolution. That theory is so well established that we might as well call it fact.
And I always wonder why people who can't accept evolution because they think the evidence doesn't point there, accept God as a fact while there is no evidence pointing there at all..?