We all know that evolution is a fact. Fact is a truth known by actual experience or observation. Evolution is defined by mutations, gene migration, natural selection and genetic drift. The first two create variation while the latter two sort variation, and this is something that we know by actual experience or observation.
But, we also know by actual experience or observation, that evolution can't create new genes. The biggest observation of evolution in action is Lenski's E.coli experiment. After more than 67.000 generations, which translated into human generations is equivalent to around one million years, this experiment resulted in 0 - zero new genes. Most of the changes in this experiment involved streamlining the genome, deleting genes no longer needed, or reducing protein expression. One of the changes involved something that proponents of evolution refers to as evidence for bacteria evolving a "key innovation" But, nothing structurally new evolved. After about 31,000 generations there was a mutational transfer of one pre-existing gene(citT) from one location to another which resulted in the ability of E.coli to grow on citrate under the oxygen-rich conditions.
How can we explain this fact of impotence of evolution? Well, quite simple. The total number of mutations in the history of life is estimated at 10^43, while the average E. coli gene size is 1000 bp which gives a library of 10^602 DNA seqeunces. Meaning, even with all evolutionary mutations spent, and with a functional landscape of size 10^100, still there is a 459 orders of magnitude lack of mutational resources to explore this library and find new functional landscapes.
So evolution is indeed a fact, but the fact is also that evolution can't create anything new that is useful.