[AndrewC]

You seemed to imply that it supports your position. Please clarify.

The support of my position is in relation to the confusion that certain people rely on when evolution is discussed. Evolution is a theory in terms which we are discussing now. Evolution as a fact depends on the fact.

It is a fact that this is(represents) a fossil.

It is not a fact that it represents a stage of dinosaur evolution(fact or theory?).

It is a fact that this is a weed.

It is a theory that it evolved into Senecio eboracensis.

[gomaaa]

Right! Right! That's how it works! You generate a theoretical framework to explain the mechanisms that produce the factual evidence the world gives you. That's science. Physics, chemistry, biology, whatever, we wll work like that! Evolution is the best theoretical framework available to explain things like the fossil and the weed. It has the potential to be falisified, in which case we would try to find another framework that could stand more difficult tests. So far it's performed admirably. That's what Gould was saying.