You wrote:
Evolution has as much to do with biology as theories about the origin of the solar system have to do with chemistry, which is nothing.The "nothing" claim was the central error. Evolution has a *huge* amount to do with biology -- it's the formative factor in almost every aspect of why modern organisms are as they are, in both the largest sense (i.e. the structure of our bodies) and at the smallest (i.e. why we have the biochemistry that we do).
As for your claim that the origin of the solar system has "nothing" to do with chemistry, that's in error too, although not to as great a degree. True, many of the laws of chemistry would remain unchanged no matter how the solar system was formed, but that doesn't make the formation of the solar system irrelevant to chemistry in general, because it does affect the chemical makeup of our planet's crust and atmosphere and the types of chemical reactions that occur naturally (a valid field for chemists). In fact, the chemical makeup of our planet (and the Moon, and so on) gives great clues to how our solar system must have (and could not have) formed, precisely *because* the nature of that origin affects the chemical makeup of the results. And conversely the laws of chemistry had a lot to do with how our solar system did form. So the subjects are hardly related by "nothing".
As for your claim that the origin of the solar system has "nothing" to do with chemistry, that's in error too, although not to as great a degree. True, many of the laws of chemistry would remain unchanged no matter how the solar system was formed, but that doesn't make the formation of the solar system irrelevant to chemistry in general, because it does affect the chemical makeup of our planet's crust and atmosphere and the types of chemical reactions that occur naturally (a valid field for chemists). In fact, the chemical makeup of our planet (and the Moon, and so on) gives great clues to how our solar system must have (and could not have) formed, precisely *because* the nature of that origin affects the chemical makeup of the results. And conversely the laws of chemistry had a lot to do with how our solar system did form. So the subjects are hardly related by "nothing".
I would ask you to identify a single chemistry test at any level, that has a chapter on the origin of the solar system. (None of mine did.)
I stand by my assertion that the origin of the solar system has nothing to do with the study of chemistry. My analogy attempted to demonstrate the absurdity of coupling evolution (non-science, to my mind) with biology (verifiable science) by coupling it with the absurd claim that speculation about the origin of the solar system is a part of the science of chemistry. I'm sorry if it went over your head.
ML/NJ