[Creationist]

I guess that the two of you have been overly educated in internet.

From Webster's New Twentieth Century Dictionary Page 1441

proof-1. any effort, process, or operation that attempts to establish truth or fact;atest; a trial; as to make proof of the truth of a statement
2. something serving as evidence that which proves or establishes: a convincing token or argument: a means of convictions.
The definitions go to 13 and yes mathematics, alcohol, photography, printing, armor are a few. but it does not say that evidence in science is not proof. If a theory has the evidence "facts" to back up the hypothesis that is proof.

But hey I understand you two get all your info from the Internet. That is not a good idea as you can find anything there to support what ever you want to propagate. If you wish to be taken seriously by lurkers you really should look up what you are arguing against.

Here lets look up evidence page 633

ev i dence 1. the condition of being evident
2.something that makes another thing evident indication sign

this is the one I really like it shows how the definition you appear to understand comes from a Darwinist hand book as it does not agree with the English language definition of evidence.
3. something that tends to prove; ground for belief

You two really must read hard copy as the Internet is destroying your ability to think.

[allmendream]

Nitrogen resin on someones hand is evidence that they might have fired a gun. Does it PROVE that they fired a gun?

An ATM receipt is evidence that the suspect might not have been at the scene of the crime. Does it PROVE that they were not at the scene of the crime?

Websters definitions are interesting but evidence is not proof and the two are not synonyms, especially in Science.

And if your interested in what lurkers think maybe you could write in proper English and in complete sentences.