Clarify what you are driving at here please.
Also, why guild the lilly with subtle distinctions on terminy when by normative understandings of prior claims such as chromosome pairs and heliocentricity could just as easily be called "wrong."
Because science uses subtle distinctions. People need to understand what the definitions are inside the scientific world as apposed to the layman use.
Clarify what you are driving at here please.
Evolution is certainly a comfortable fit with its explanatory power, but that is a post hoc benefit. What macro changes has it, or can it testably predict?
Because science uses subtle distinctions. People need to understand what the definitions are inside the scientific world as apposed to the layman use.
Science doesn't have a monopoly on subtleties. People understand quite well what a scientist means when he tells them evolution is a fact, and it's not the same thing your abstract posited about 23 chromosomes being a titular "fact."