Thank you for your definitions. It is good to be on the same page in definitions.
The thing about definitions though is the implication that a certain concept is different because it is identified by a different word.
.... a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
I would then say that many of the concepts of the theory of evolution are based on "Guess" (your word) rather than theorys.
Why then are students thrown out of college for "Guessing" different than the official "guesser"?
What there is of "guessing" (speculation unrooted in relevant and crucial evidence) tends to get cast aside. The problem (for your view of evolutionary science) is that scientists in that field are every bit as competitive and intellectually aggressive as those in any other.
There are several ways to make a reputation in science:
Your comic book view of evolution (thinking Jack Chick here of course) requires a massive departure from basic tendencies of human nature by the whole of evolutionary science. It requires that thousands of experts, thoroughly familiar with the relevant evidence, and trained to rip apart inadequate ideas, repeatedly and universally refrain from doing so even though it would be in their direct professional interest.