With regards to the notion of evolution as a fact, or as a theory, there are two things going on here.
There is evolution, that is the change in the distribution of phenotypes (visible biological characteristics) within a population over time. This would be difficult to dispute as a fact. After all, you are not identical to either of your parents.
There are then attempts to explain it. These are called "theories of evolution," and there are several, although it is usually taken as a given that the dominant one, the so-called "Theory of Evolution," a modification of what Darwin proposed, is what is referred to. It's actually a synthesis of the ideas of Darwin and Mendel, plus some tweaking.
There are clearly weaknesses in the theory. As with all scientific theories, it depends on a simplified model of the universe, and so cannot explain everything. The theory is always being scrutinised and modified, for instance recently the notion of "punctuated equilibrium" has come to the fore. It would take a professional evolutionary biologist to enumerate these weaknesses fairly and accurately, and it would present difficulties to the layperson due to the amount of assumed knowledge, jargon and so forth.
It remains the most probable explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. More precisely, it explains the following set of observations:
- There is diversity in living forms. Flies are different from poppies.
- Those differences can be inherited. Any children that I might sire are much more likely to be humans with pale skin than flies.
- There is a struggle for survival. Not every living thing will be able to survive and sire children.
Come up with a better explanation for those observations than what we've got right now, wait twenty or so years, and collect your Nobel Prize.