Evolution in action.

[RoadRunner79]

Well when speaking about evolution, I normally ask what they mean by evolution.
If you mean change and variation which is observed in species and in populations, then I think this is well evidenced, and really don't know anyone who denies this.  
If you are talking about universal common descent, changing body plans over time, and developing novel complicated systems;  I'm very skeptical.  I do think that there is evidence for it, but also reasons against it (neither being conclusive or very strong).  I find many of the claims overreaching what the evidence is, and principles that only apply when they confirm what is already believed.  The third way in which the term evolution is also part of the problem for the second.   I don't believe there is a mechanism which justifies the inferences being made in common descent. To be clearer, I think the neo-darwinian mechanism of random changes plus time is false.   I don't think that there is any evidence for it, and that there are good reasons against it.  I'll admit, that some of the other camps for a mechanism or the way in which evolution occurs, I have some familiarity with, but have never heard anything that peaked my interest enough to investigate further (as well as not being as popular). Here I would be more skeptical.  

I believed in evolution mostly on faith (because I was told to), then I believed in theistic evolution (after I became a Christian), I learned more about evolution, and I am currently at the positions described above.  I don't think that evolution is in conflict with my world view, or have ulterior positions that would need me to deny evolution.

So, I'm not an evolutionary biologist and also not ashamed to admit my ignorance on the details.  When you say "theistic evolution," does that mean you are in the Baraminology/macro versus micro evolution camp? I apologize if I am oversimplifying your position.  As I said, I am not trained in this particular field of science.

I had to look it up... That is the first time I have heard about Bariminolgy. While I am sure that like anything else; theistic evolution has many different nuances and distinctions within the group, it normally refers to those who believe in theism and many of the ways in which the word evolution is framed.

For me, macroevolution would be the line where I become skeptical, and don't think the claims are very well supported. Granted for a naturalist, who believes that the world and life had a beginning, I do understand where many of the claims are the most reasonable explanation.... I also do not think that evolution is falsifiable under this view.