Just for the sake of material to learn from, which evolution theory{ or fact if you think so} is true? I find that like each christian has their own view of creation each evolutionist has their own brand of evolution they think is true. So as a baseline which evolution {and it's is the most commonly held subsets} is the most widely accepted and thought true? Links would be appreciated.
I'm not entirely sure what you're asking, but I think you're equating evolutionary theory to something like denominational standpoint. While there are some detractors from what might be called 'mainstream evolutionary theory', the vast majority of reputable scientists adhere to the same principles, though they may use different terms.
Generally, evolutionary theory is as follows:
An organism mutates and reproduces, thus that particular organism itself becomes slightly different than other organisms of the same 'type'. For instance, in humans, some humans have blue eyes, some have green eyes. They're still 'humans', but they have different genetic characteristics. The same could be said of dark skin, or even genetic conditions such as sickle cell.
Natural selection comes into play when any mutation gives either an environmental advantage, or a disadvantage. For instance, sickle cell as a disease is itself a disadvantage when is is symptomatic, but when it is not symptimatic, it provides heightened immunity to malaria. And it is no coincidence that the instances of people who have sickle cell is highest in the places where malaria is most common.
Thus, those with asymptomatic sickle cell anaemia in malaria zones are more likely to survive malaria, thus reproduce and pass on their genes (mutation and all). That's an example of what some people call 'micro-evolution'. It is a small genetic change.
The larger changes happen the more advantageous or disadvantageous mutations accumulate in the lineage.
Let's say that twenty thousand years from now, the lineage of those who passed on the sickle cell gene have accrued various genetic mutations such as heightened hearing, or larger ears, or furrowed brows to combat intense sunlight. Eventually those people will look far different than the organisms way back when most people didn't have sickle cell. Those who didn't have sickle cell may also have furthered their lineages without the gene, thus we could have two variations of humankind with very different physical and genetic characteristics.
This is why we still have, for instance, apes. Even though humans evolved from apes, some apes did not mutate the genes necessary to further lineages that would eventually become human. Humans now rule, due to increased cranial capacity and a high density of neurons. Thus, we are 'naturally selected'.
In a nutshell, that's really how evolution by natural selection works.
