Brazko
Well-Known Member
O.K. This is pointless. I did not give an hierarchy from theories to laws, The two are exactly that, not the same. That is my point tho.. Both consist of facts, but there is a difference and that is the exact point I'm making.. I'll share this with you and
Words have precise meanings in science. For example, 'theory', 'law', and 'hypothesis' don't all mean the same thing. Outside of science, you might say something is 'just a theory', meaning it's supposition that may or may not be true. In science, a theory is an explanation that generally is accepted to be true. Here's a closer look at these important, commonly misused terms.
Hypothesis
A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.
Example: If you see no difference in the cleaning ability of various laundry detergents, you might hypothesize that cleaning effectiveness is not affected by which detergent you use. You can see this hypothesis can be disproven if a stain is removed by one detergent and not another. On the other hand, you cannot prove the hypothesis. Even if you never see a difference in the cleanliness of your clothes after trying a thousand detergents, there might be one you haven't tried that could be different.
Theory
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.
Example: It is known that on June 30, 1908 in Tunguska, Siberia, there was an explosion equivalent to the detonation of about 15 million tons of TNT. Many hypotheses have been proposed for what caused the explosion. It is theorized that the explosion was caused by a natural extraterrestrial phenomenon, and was not caused by man. Is this theory a fact? No. The event is a recorded fact. Is this this theory generally accepted to be true, based on evidence to-date? Yes. Can this theory be shown to be false and be discarded? Yes.
Law
A law generalizes a body of observations. At the time it is made, no exceptions have been found to a law. Scientific laws explain things, but they do not describe them. One way to tell a law and a theory apart is to ask if the description gives you a means to explain 'why'.
Example: Consider Newton's Law of Gravity. Newton could use this law to predict the behavior of a dropped object, but he couldn't explain why it happened.
As you can see, there is no 'proof' or absolute 'truth' in science. The closest we get are facts, which are indisputable observations. Note, however, if you define proof as arriving at a logical conclusion, based on the evidence, then there is 'proof' in science. I work under the definition that to prove something implies it can never be wrong, which is different. If you're asked to define hypothesis, theory, and law, keep in mind the definitions of proof and of these words can vary slightly depending on the scientific discipline. What is important is to realize they don't all mean the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably.
Words have precise meanings in science. For example, 'theory', 'law', and 'hypothesis' don't all mean the same thing. Outside of science, you might say something is 'just a theory', meaning it's supposition that may or may not be true. In science, a theory is an explanation that generally is accepted to be true. Here's a closer look at these important, commonly misused terms.
Hypothesis
A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.
Example: If you see no difference in the cleaning ability of various laundry detergents, you might hypothesize that cleaning effectiveness is not affected by which detergent you use. You can see this hypothesis can be disproven if a stain is removed by one detergent and not another. On the other hand, you cannot prove the hypothesis. Even if you never see a difference in the cleanliness of your clothes after trying a thousand detergents, there might be one you haven't tried that could be different.
Theory
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.
Example: It is known that on June 30, 1908 in Tunguska, Siberia, there was an explosion equivalent to the detonation of about 15 million tons of TNT. Many hypotheses have been proposed for what caused the explosion. It is theorized that the explosion was caused by a natural extraterrestrial phenomenon, and was not caused by man. Is this theory a fact? No. The event is a recorded fact. Is this this theory generally accepted to be true, based on evidence to-date? Yes. Can this theory be shown to be false and be discarded? Yes.
Law
A law generalizes a body of observations. At the time it is made, no exceptions have been found to a law. Scientific laws explain things, but they do not describe them. One way to tell a law and a theory apart is to ask if the description gives you a means to explain 'why'.
Example: Consider Newton's Law of Gravity. Newton could use this law to predict the behavior of a dropped object, but he couldn't explain why it happened.
As you can see, there is no 'proof' or absolute 'truth' in science. The closest we get are facts, which are indisputable observations. Note, however, if you define proof as arriving at a logical conclusion, based on the evidence, then there is 'proof' in science. I work under the definition that to prove something implies it can never be wrong, which is different. If you're asked to define hypothesis, theory, and law, keep in mind the definitions of proof and of these words can vary slightly depending on the scientific discipline. What is important is to realize they don't all mean the same thing and cannot be used interchangeably.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
You're trying to teach me? Priceless!O.K. This is pointless. I did not give an hierarchy from theories to laws, The two are exactly that, not the same. That is my point tho.. Both consist of facts, but there is a difference and that is the exact point I'm making.. I'll share this with you and
You're the one that said, "That is why it is not Fact, or Law... (Macro) The theory
.. It doesn't matter what I believe, It's not Scientific fact, Yet!!" That implies you think that theories are eventually proved and become facts. That is a hierarchy.
Keep dodging the questions I asked you.
Brazko
Well-Known Member
NO, (pause) Yes, theories are based on facts, facts are summarized into laws, laws do not change, theories do, evolution is fact, the theory of evolution is not... I said ditto, that included the don't follow so well part too....
I'm not trying to teach you anything, I'm trying to clarify my view, but I keep hearing creationist, unicorn, what time is the Deacon meeting...
What question am I dodging? Why did you dodge my question, with the prokaryotic reply...?
I thought to myself... Pointless, no need to answer!
I'm not trying to teach you anything, I'm trying to clarify my view, but I keep hearing creationist, unicorn, what time is the Deacon meeting...
What question am I dodging? Why did you dodge my question, with the prokaryotic reply...?
I thought to myself... Pointless, no need to answer!
You're trying to teach me? Priceless!
You're the one that said, "That is why it is not Fact, or Law... (Macro) The theory
That implies you think that theories are eventually proved and become facts. That is a hierarchy.
Keep dodging the questions I asked you.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
How was my answer a dodge? You gave two options and I answered with one. Did you not understand it?NO, (pause) Yes, theories are based on facts, facts are summarized into laws, laws do not change, theories do, evolution is fact, the theory of evolution is not... I said ditto, that included the don't follow so well part too....
I'm not trying to teach you anything, I'm trying to clarify my view, but I keep hearing creationist, unicorn, what time is the Deacon meeting...
What question am I dodging? Why did you dodge my question, with the prokaryotic reply...?
I thought to myself... Pointless, no need to answer!
That is unlike the questions I posed to you which you never attempted to answer, to tell me how specifically evolution fails in the scientific method.
Do you think atomic theory is a fact? How about general relativity? These were the questions you dodged.
motoracer110
Well-Known Member
Thought i would bring this up. Evolution is a THEORY. The same scientists that strongly believe in evolution also believed in global warming and we all know that turned out as a FALSE prediction. I wouldn't go off of science for your proof.
converseking
Well-Known Member
im w/ this guy
motoracer110
Well-Known Member
10 facts that prove evolution is false
Scientific Fact No. 1 - Birds Prove Natural Selection is Naturally Wrong
Help! I can't fly. My head is too big, and my wings are too small.
The idea of natural selection sounds great when considering deer. The deer that can sense danger the quickest and run the fastest are able to escape the predator on a more consistent basis. However, other examples on the evolutionary tree have many laughable flaws. One of the best is the thought that a bird began to evolve a wing. Why this would occur is not answered by evolutionists. The wing stub did not make the bird more adaptable in his environment. The wing was much too small for the bird to fly. Why would a bird evolve a wing that was useless? This is backwards from the evolutionary natural selection concept that birds adapt and change in order to survive better in their environment. The bird with a half-size wing is placed at a disadvantage in its environment. Why would the bird continue for millions of generations improving a wing that was useless? The theory of evolution is based on natural selection of the most adaptable member of a species. A bird with a useless wing is at a severe disadvantage and the opposite from natural selection. According to natural selection the members of the bird species with the smallest useless wing would be the most adaptable and most likely to survive in the largest numbers. According to the theory of natural selection birds could never evolve to fly. Evolution is simply nonsense. This is so funny. We are then led to believe that some birds got tired of carrying around a worthless half-size wing so they grew fingers on the end to help climb trees. The wings became arms and a new species was developed. Evolutionists actually believe this nonsense.
Scientific Fact No. 2 - Species Without a Link Proves Evolution is Wrong
The evolutionist will claim that the presence of many individual species proves evolution. This shallow statement is devoid of reason, logic and scientific proof. Evolutionists line up pictures of similar looking species and claim they evolved one to another. Humans are a great example. There are hundreds of species of extinct monkeys and apes. Petrified skulls and bones exist from these creatures. Evolutionists line up the most promising choices to present a gradual progression from monkey to modern man. They simply fill in the big gaps with make-believe creatures to fit the picture. This procedure can be done with humans only because there are many extinct monkey and ape species. They never do this with giraffes and elephants. These pictures are placed in all evolutionists' text books to teach kids this nonsense. The picture is simply a grouping of individual species that does not prove evolution.
Scientific Fact No. 3 - Single Cell Complexity Proves Evolution is Wrong
Scientists a century ago believed the smallest single living cell was a simple life form. The theory developed that perhaps lightning struck a pond of water causing several molecules to combine in a random way which by chance resulted in a living cell. The cell then divided and evolved into higher life forms. This view is now proven to be immature to the degree of being ridiculous. The most modern laboratory is unable to create a living cell. In fact, scientists have been unable to create a single left-hand protein molecule as found in all animals.
Scientific Fact No. 4 - Human Egg and Sperm Proves Evolution is Wrong
The evolutionist ignores the problem surrounding the human female egg and the male sperm in the evolutionary theory. The female egg contains the X-chromosome and the male sperm contains either an X-chromosome for the reproduction of a male or a Y-chromosome for the reproduction of a female. The female eggs all develop within the ovaries while she is a baby (fetus) within her mother's womb. Evolutionists claim environmental factors cause small changes in the offspring in the evolutionary chain. However, the environmental experience of the female cannot change the chromosomes within her eggs and cannot have any effect upon her offspring. Her body cannot go into the eggs contained within her ovaries at her birth to make an intelligent change. Females cannot be a part of the evolutionary theory for these reasons.
Scientific Fact No. 5 - DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong
The scientific fact that DNA replication includes a built-in error checking method and a DNA repair process proves the evolutionary theory is wrong. The fact is that any attempt by the DNA to change is stopped and reversed.
Scientific Fact No. 6 - Chaos From Organization Proves Evolution is Wrong
The second law of thermodynamics proves that organization cannot flow from chaos. Complex live organisms cannot rearrange themselves into an organism of a higher form as claimed by evolutionists. This is scientifically backwards according to the second law of thermodynamics that has never been proven wrong. Scientists cannot have it both ways. The second law of thermodynamics is proven to be correct. Evolution lacks any scientific proof. Evolution is simply an empty theory.
Scientific Fact No. 7 - Chromosome Count Proves Evolution is Wrong
There is no scientific evidence that a species can change the number of chromosomes within the DNA. The chromosome count within each species is fixed. This is the reason a male from one species cannot mate successfully with a female of another species. Man could not evolve from a monkey. Each species is locked into its chromosome count that cannot change. If an animal developed an extra chromosome or lost a chromosome because of some deformity, it could not successfully mate. The defect could not be passed along to the next generation. Evolving a new species is scientifically impossible. Evolutionists prove that getting a college education does not impart wisdom.
Scientific Fact No. 8 - Origin of Matter and Stars Proves Evolution is Wrong
Evolutionists just throw up their hands at the question of the origin of matter because they know something cannot evolve from nothing. They stick their heads in the sand and ignore the problem. The fact that matter exists in outrageously large quantities simply proves evolution is wrong. The "Big Bang" theory doesn't solve the problem either. Matter and energy have to come from somewhere.
Scientific Fact No. 9 - Lack of Life on Mars Proves Evolution is Wrong
Two NASA two land rovers named Spirit and Opportunity explored Mars during 2004. The topography shows obvious signs of past liquid rivers flowing in numerous places. The rovers have proven that water was once abundant on the surface of Mars, but they have not been able to find any signs of life or any signs of past life on the planet. Mars has a proven history of flowing water on the surface and an atmosphere suitable to support life forms. The planet has had all of the conditions necessary to provide the "spark" of life according to the evolutionary theory, yet there is no life on Mars. The river beds and river banks show no signs of vegetation or trees. The ground has no fossils and no organisms. The place is absolutely sterile.
Scientific Fact No. 10 - Radio Silence from Space Proves Evolution is Wrong
Mars is not the only place that shows no signs of life. The entire universe lacks any sign of life. There are no radio signals that can be related to intelligent life forms. None of the billions of galaxies has been found to emit any intelligent radio signals. Scientists have been pointing every type of radio telescope possible into space for several decades in hopes of finding an intelligent signal. No signs of life beyond Earth have been found. We are alone.
Scientific Fact No. 1 - Birds Prove Natural Selection is Naturally Wrong
Help! I can't fly. My head is too big, and my wings are too small.
The idea of natural selection sounds great when considering deer. The deer that can sense danger the quickest and run the fastest are able to escape the predator on a more consistent basis. However, other examples on the evolutionary tree have many laughable flaws. One of the best is the thought that a bird began to evolve a wing. Why this would occur is not answered by evolutionists. The wing stub did not make the bird more adaptable in his environment. The wing was much too small for the bird to fly. Why would a bird evolve a wing that was useless? This is backwards from the evolutionary natural selection concept that birds adapt and change in order to survive better in their environment. The bird with a half-size wing is placed at a disadvantage in its environment. Why would the bird continue for millions of generations improving a wing that was useless? The theory of evolution is based on natural selection of the most adaptable member of a species. A bird with a useless wing is at a severe disadvantage and the opposite from natural selection. According to natural selection the members of the bird species with the smallest useless wing would be the most adaptable and most likely to survive in the largest numbers. According to the theory of natural selection birds could never evolve to fly. Evolution is simply nonsense. This is so funny. We are then led to believe that some birds got tired of carrying around a worthless half-size wing so they grew fingers on the end to help climb trees. The wings became arms and a new species was developed. Evolutionists actually believe this nonsense.
Scientific Fact No. 2 - Species Without a Link Proves Evolution is Wrong
The evolutionist will claim that the presence of many individual species proves evolution. This shallow statement is devoid of reason, logic and scientific proof. Evolutionists line up pictures of similar looking species and claim they evolved one to another. Humans are a great example. There are hundreds of species of extinct monkeys and apes. Petrified skulls and bones exist from these creatures. Evolutionists line up the most promising choices to present a gradual progression from monkey to modern man. They simply fill in the big gaps with make-believe creatures to fit the picture. This procedure can be done with humans only because there are many extinct monkey and ape species. They never do this with giraffes and elephants. These pictures are placed in all evolutionists' text books to teach kids this nonsense. The picture is simply a grouping of individual species that does not prove evolution.
Scientific Fact No. 3 - Single Cell Complexity Proves Evolution is Wrong
Scientists a century ago believed the smallest single living cell was a simple life form. The theory developed that perhaps lightning struck a pond of water causing several molecules to combine in a random way which by chance resulted in a living cell. The cell then divided and evolved into higher life forms. This view is now proven to be immature to the degree of being ridiculous. The most modern laboratory is unable to create a living cell. In fact, scientists have been unable to create a single left-hand protein molecule as found in all animals.
Scientific Fact No. 4 - Human Egg and Sperm Proves Evolution is Wrong
The evolutionist ignores the problem surrounding the human female egg and the male sperm in the evolutionary theory. The female egg contains the X-chromosome and the male sperm contains either an X-chromosome for the reproduction of a male or a Y-chromosome for the reproduction of a female. The female eggs all develop within the ovaries while she is a baby (fetus) within her mother's womb. Evolutionists claim environmental factors cause small changes in the offspring in the evolutionary chain. However, the environmental experience of the female cannot change the chromosomes within her eggs and cannot have any effect upon her offspring. Her body cannot go into the eggs contained within her ovaries at her birth to make an intelligent change. Females cannot be a part of the evolutionary theory for these reasons.
Scientific Fact No. 5 - DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong
The scientific fact that DNA replication includes a built-in error checking method and a DNA repair process proves the evolutionary theory is wrong. The fact is that any attempt by the DNA to change is stopped and reversed.
Scientific Fact No. 6 - Chaos From Organization Proves Evolution is Wrong
The second law of thermodynamics proves that organization cannot flow from chaos. Complex live organisms cannot rearrange themselves into an organism of a higher form as claimed by evolutionists. This is scientifically backwards according to the second law of thermodynamics that has never been proven wrong. Scientists cannot have it both ways. The second law of thermodynamics is proven to be correct. Evolution lacks any scientific proof. Evolution is simply an empty theory.
Scientific Fact No. 7 - Chromosome Count Proves Evolution is Wrong
There is no scientific evidence that a species can change the number of chromosomes within the DNA. The chromosome count within each species is fixed. This is the reason a male from one species cannot mate successfully with a female of another species. Man could not evolve from a monkey. Each species is locked into its chromosome count that cannot change. If an animal developed an extra chromosome or lost a chromosome because of some deformity, it could not successfully mate. The defect could not be passed along to the next generation. Evolving a new species is scientifically impossible. Evolutionists prove that getting a college education does not impart wisdom.
Scientific Fact No. 8 - Origin of Matter and Stars Proves Evolution is Wrong
Evolutionists just throw up their hands at the question of the origin of matter because they know something cannot evolve from nothing. They stick their heads in the sand and ignore the problem. The fact that matter exists in outrageously large quantities simply proves evolution is wrong. The "Big Bang" theory doesn't solve the problem either. Matter and energy have to come from somewhere.
Scientific Fact No. 9 - Lack of Life on Mars Proves Evolution is Wrong
Two NASA two land rovers named Spirit and Opportunity explored Mars during 2004. The topography shows obvious signs of past liquid rivers flowing in numerous places. The rovers have proven that water was once abundant on the surface of Mars, but they have not been able to find any signs of life or any signs of past life on the planet. Mars has a proven history of flowing water on the surface and an atmosphere suitable to support life forms. The planet has had all of the conditions necessary to provide the "spark" of life according to the evolutionary theory, yet there is no life on Mars. The river beds and river banks show no signs of vegetation or trees. The ground has no fossils and no organisms. The place is absolutely sterile.
Scientific Fact No. 10 - Radio Silence from Space Proves Evolution is Wrong
Mars is not the only place that shows no signs of life. The entire universe lacks any sign of life. There are no radio signals that can be related to intelligent life forms. None of the billions of galaxies has been found to emit any intelligent radio signals. Scientists have been pointing every type of radio telescope possible into space for several decades in hopes of finding an intelligent signal. No signs of life beyond Earth have been found. We are alone.
converseking
Well-Known Member
Evolution is a THEORY that could be dead wrong bt i'd much rather believe in that theory then the many fairy tales in all the diff religons in the world. i mean most of the stuff people believe coulda just been thought up and written down by people or sum jackass who got jus as baked 1000-10,000 yr's ago as we all get right now.
Brazko
Well-Known Member
You dodge it in the sense of that you simply will not understand.., I started to explain it within the terms of only using eukaryotics, but it is Pointless... so moving on.
In short, Atomic theory was proven not to be fact and continues to change, not the facts, the theories predicted from the facts (get it, Am I clear). General Relativity is not complete, it is based on facts but is not conclusive within itself.. therefore a Theory
In short, Atomic theory was proven not to be fact and continues to change, not the facts, the theories predicted from the facts (get it, Am I clear). General Relativity is not complete, it is based on facts but is not conclusive within itself.. therefore a Theory
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
You are correct that they are incomplete but they have been confirmed to the point they can be considered factual. The basics are most definitely correct, there will only be slight modifications, tweaking if you will.
Since you think theories can be proved an become facts, why don't you tell us one scientific theory that has made such a transition. Though I doubt you will answer since you continue to avoid my other direct question about what part of the scientific method does evolution fail.
I don't understand? I think I understand much more about biological science than you do. How does limiting your question to eukaryotes only make any sense since evolution doesn't think that we came from a single eukaryotic species but the first life was prokaryotic therefore the answer has to be there.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
This is so full of fail it's not even worth responding point-by-point especially since much of this is merely straw man tactics.
motoracer110
Well-Known Member
Ummmm this is not TACTICS this is FACT. you dont know what you are talking about do you?
Brazko
Well-Known Member
Theories don't get proved, that is why they are not fact, however working towards theories, we utilize the facts into working laws.., that law becomes scientific fact.
I feel you know a lot more about biological science. The point is we don't know enough about our ancestral past to conclude the theory, into a science, that becomes law.. Fact
Yes, the answer is there, so the theory on evolution is not conclusive and varies at that point between those stages and beyond. I did not say evolution does not follow the scientific method, mattter of fact I stated just the opposite. This discussion is an illusion of your own making because you are polarized. You are going through a cycle. I'm not that person, and that is not this discussion. That is a theory and not a Fact!!
I feel you know a lot more about biological science. The point is we don't know enough about our ancestral past to conclude the theory, into a science, that becomes law.. Fact
Yes, the answer is there, so the theory on evolution is not conclusive and varies at that point between those stages and beyond. I did not say evolution does not follow the scientific method, mattter of fact I stated just the opposite. This discussion is an illusion of your own making because you are polarized. You are going through a cycle. I'm not that person, and that is not this discussion. That is a theory and not a Fact!!
P
PadawanBater
Guest
Goddamn that's ridiculous! Every single one of those claims is utterly retarded, unbelievable. I started out correcting it, but that shit would take too long..
As to "it's just a theory! not a fact!" - here you go.
[youtube]VxnvmmhxPUo[/youtube]
Brazko
Well-Known Member
In both replies, I perceive theories in the same sense and light..and capable of discerning the difference. Neither exclaimed any difference as to why a theory is factual, because that is simply what they are...theories not facts, no matter how less or, important the other were. They both stated more or less that facts are not important to theories, and that was my point made.
motoracer110
Well-Known Member
so do you believe in global warming because a bunch scientist told you it is happening??????????
P
PadawanBater
Guest
Absolutely.
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/299672-global-warming-update.html
Just like I'll believe the Dr. if he tells me I have cancer. That's kinda the idea... you trust the professionals, the guys who are actively studying the stuff you've got questions about. Why would you believe the guy with little experience? Would you let that same guy fly the plane you're traveling in?
[youtube]T5kumHLiK4A[/youtube]
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
It appears you have very short term memory of your own statements
You still seem to be misunderstanding scientific laws. They are no more factual than theories. They are just a set of observations. Laws are subject to change if we observe something counter to that law. Newton's Laws of Motion had to be modified to work at relativistic speeds. Coulumb's Law had to be modified for QED.
Theories are the set of facts put together to form an explanation of those facts. The theory of gravity takes the things we know about gravity (that masses attract proportional to their mass, etc.) and attempts to explain why - because the curvature of spacetime that pushes things together. We are not pulled to the earth, spacetime pushes us down to the earth. Quantum gravity attempts to explain how it works in the subatomic level.
The Theory of Evolution takes the facts that we know about evolution, that species are related and display a twin nested hierarchy, that geologic time is necessary for the large scale changes, the earliest lifeforms on this planet were simple and more complex species did not arrive until much later, and combines them into a theory that explains what we see in genetics and the fossil record. That is that environmental pressures select for the organisms that are most able to survive and those traits are passed down to the next generation. This is natural selection, the MECHANISMS for evolution are the only theoretical parts, everything else is a fact because it is an observation. Even the theoretical part of common ancestry is de facto proven by modern genetics. Yes I know nothing is ever 'proven' in science, but there is too much overwhelming evidence for common ancestry, it cannot be dismissed. Theories are the backbone of science. Raw facts and laws have no power to explain nature, only theories do. To continue to complain that something is not a fact YET misunderstand what a theory and a fact is and that theories are built upon facts.
The funny thing is you acknowledge theories don't become facts then one sentence later say
You seem very confused.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
I know that most of that bullshit copy and paste misrepresents what evolution actually claims, hence a strawman.
I would say I know quite a bit more about science and evolutionary biology than you do and have the credentials to back it up.