Sorry for your disturbance, FRiend, but the truth of the matter is that evolution theory is part of "real science", and whatever you might propose is most likely not.
So, if you wish to cite some specifics, I'll be happy to review them with you.
Nifster: "Do not bother trying to reply or explain.
your best efforts have fallen short and only underscore the inability of true science to add to ‘evolutionary theory’."
Sorry, but "true science" is not what you claim.
Rather, it's what natural-scientists say, and that includes ideas incorporated in the term "evolution".
Of course you are free -- totally -- to discount and disbelieve anything real scientists report, and nobody will interfere with you, so long as you don't call your own ideas, "science".
They're not.
Your definition of science is ridiculous…
“Sorry, but “true science” is not what you claim.
Rather, it’s what natural-scientists say,”
You obviously have never taken a course in the hard sciences. No physicist, chemist, or engineer I know would make such a silly statement.
Post all you want I will no longer bother to post back to you…..pearls before swine and all