[Tribune7]

The topic of this thread, and the one to which I referred, is Biological Evolution, i.e., the Origin of the Species.

And I'm sure you were. But it can't be disputed that the phrase is often used -- correctly -- to mean "a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena."

Your repudiation of that concept actually advances the debate but it doesn't hurt to continually point out its inherent silliness.

[longshadow]

But it can't be disputed that the phrase [The Theory of Evolution] is often used -- correctly -- to mean "a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena." [insertion to make clear what the antecedent phrase was]

I DO dispute it. My copy of Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary contains no such definition for the "Theory of Evolution"... in fact, the "Theory of Evolution" isn't even an entry.

The word "evolution" IS, on the other hand well defined, and ONE of those definitions is: "any process of formation or growth; development," which clearly can be used in reference to a wide range of subjects, e.g., the "evolution" of language, the "evolution" of culture, the "evolution" of biological entities, "evolution" of the space program, stellar "evolution," and yes, even "evolution" of the Universe, i.e., cosmological "evolution."

But neither the phrase "Theory of evolution" nor the the word "evolution" is synonymous with Cosmology, and I've never seen a competent modern science text use the phrase "Theory of Evolution" in a cosmological context.

So, in conclusion, the word "evolution" can be used to characterize any process of formation or growth; but by itself, it does not mean "the formation and growth of the Universe."