I know what the scientific definition of "fact" is in the scientific community. Fact: does not mean with absolute certainty.
Just like the scientific communities flim flam pointing to the 2% difference between men and chimps, and not pointing out that there is only a 3% difference between a man and an ear of corn. Fact does not mean with absolute certainty in science. There are so many black boxes in their theory, that the veiwing of it on film, well lets just say that it is very revealing.
Citation please. (Admit it, you just made that up)
A 'fact' is a data point. This is what observations provide. It is not synonymous with 'truth'. Absolute certainty is nothing more than wishful thinking.
"Just like the scientific communities flim flam pointing to the 2% difference between men and chimps, and not pointing out that there is only a 3% difference between a man and an ear of corn.
Let's see, humans have a genome of 3,400,000 base pairs, 46 chromosomes and from 25,000 to 30,000 genes. Maize (corn) has 2,500,000 base pairs, 10 chromosomes and ~50,000 genes. How is that in any way within 3%?
I'm afraid the sources you have been reading are more interested in refuting evolution than they are in truthful accuracy.
It seems the flim flam is coming from your side of the argument.
Thanks very much for giving me the greatest laugh of my day...3% difference between a man and an ear of corn? Its going to be hard, for anyone to beat that whacky notion...