Why is evolution still considered to be a theory?

It is not a postulate because it has a wide array of physical evidence supporting it. It is not a law because it is simply too large and not entire well-defined to be entirely, absolutely applicable 100% of the time. However, Universal Gravity is also a theory; keep in mind that in science, a Theory is actually a very solid entity--not at all the way we think about it in day to day life.

Only microevolution is proven. Macroevolution isn't anywhere close to being proven. None of what you listed is evidence for macroevolution.

Yes, most people think fossil means evolution, but the truth is there have been no transitional fossils found! Merely one or two weak possibilites. There's also no living transitional forms, and there are numerous 'anomalies' of "living fossils" which is fossils found early on which scientists thought were extinct the so-called millions, now billions, soon trillions, of years ago, but have since been found alive and well upon planet earth, and you guessed it, they forgot to 'evolve'. Bacteria resistance has to do with natural selection, a held belief long before Darwin. The resistant bacteria survives the antibiotic, and then those resistant bacteria multiply/reproduce. The resistance was there, not previously not there, and then evolved. Evolution as a hypothesis of origins is largely a series of possibilities at best.. imagination really.. Take Richard Dawkin's famous, flying squirrel evovled into the bat, hypothesis.. well, for the very long time (ages) that the squirrel was transitioning and neither squirrel nor bat, how did it survive? Evolutionists won't even attempt to answer that. Or the famous, the blue whale evolved from a land cow? oh? how did the cow/whale survive when it was neither efficient yet as a whale, nor any longer as a cow? As far as evolution making more sense than an intelligent designer? How can one look at all the diversity of life and say it all evolved from nothing? For the universe/matter is not eternal. As matter, the Law Of Thermodynamics firmly states is falling apart.. deteriorating.. how then can it be improving and becoming all the complex life forms and life (trees, plants, etc) which we see all around us? And the bible says all things have seed "according to its own kind" and this is exactly what we can observe. Now when dog breeders can breed a cat from a dog, then evolution may have a case.. Until then it's at best a ridiculous fairy tale for adults which allows them to say man is the highest power and he gets to decide good from evil. One of the latest debates is "where does information come from?" I.E. the great mass of information in the dna codes of all living things. When someone can prove my computer, or any of its programs evolved from nothing and on its own.. well, then I may look again at this outdated theory aka hypothesis.

I think you are correct. Given a choice between science and superposition any thinking person must come down on the side of science. There are many creation stories and many religions. Most originated before mankind had the tools of science. The one thing most have in common is the egotistical idea that man is somehow set apart from the rest of life on this planet. If we fail to see the beauty of our shared kinship with all other life we lose our respect for it. This article will explain why the "Theory of Natural Selection" is still considered a theory. http://tinyurl.com/232dj5

You have many flaws in your beliefs - it would help if you knew exactly what a scientific theory was. A theory is an explanation based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning. That said, the most accurate scientific explanation in the world can still be considered a theory. Evolution was not meant to explain how life began. It is meant to explain the transition from simple living beings to complex living beings. That said, macro evolution does have a lot of physical evidence supporting it, but until we actually witness macro evolution occur, it is not yet proven, so it can not be considered a fact. However, just because we have not yet seen macro-evolution occur, doesn't disprove evolution.

Because it is a theory (a wrong one at that - my belief). What about bacteria, antibiotic resistance, fossils, etc, makes you believe that evolution is anything more than a theory?