[Dimensio]

Instead of blurting--"If you don't agree, you need to go back to biology class!" try negotiating. Instead of the snarky, "You don't know what the word means!"you might make the effort to find a common definition.

The problem is that I see quite a bit of poisoning the well from the creationists disputing the definitions. You yourself have accused us of redefining the words "theory" and "species", not even allowing for the possibility that you might simply be mistaken as to the meaning of "theory" in a scientific context, and not allowing that you might be wrong about the meaning of the word "species" in general.

[Mamzelle]

re: not even allowing for the possibility that you might simply be mistaken as to the meaning of "theory" in a scientific context)))

Theory certainly has more than one definition, and is an abstract term that connotes more than it denotes. So does "evolution"--evolution may not mean speciation, but it is closely associated and when discussing one, the other comes to the party. That's how language and rhetoric work--and, ethical absolutist I might be, meanings are always and inevitably in the mind of the beholder.

Dispute is not mistake.