[wallcrawlr]

Sure, generally I'd agree with you.

But not for us that dont accept evolution as fact. In that instance...conjecture is more appropriate.

[Dimensio]

But not for us that dont accept evolution as fact. In that instance...conjecture is more appropriate.

Not accepting evolution as fact is one thing. Asserting that it's all conjecture is either dishonesty or ignorance of the evidence presented for it.

Argue that the evidence is invalid, that's fine (so long as said arguments aren't faulty), but don't pretend that nothing has been presented apart from speculation. And this still does not justify dishonestly swapping out definitions when speaking of the theory. You know what scientists mean when they use the word "theory" in the context of scientific theory, so stop pulling out a dictionary and trying to tell us that they mean something else. We're not stupid and we're not logically deficient, so we're not going to fall for it.