Exactly the point. A 'change of allele frequencies of a population over time' is equally consistent with a created biology that is in decline and is no unique evidence supporting evolution. It is merely a definition-game where you define a word one way and then use it another.
"Perhaps you’d be better served redirecting your dislike of evolution as both fact and theory to origin of life theories."
Ah, the fallacy of appeal to emotion. Good one. You must be about out of arguments.
"Please send an e-mail to Professor Minnich and tell him what you have just told me."
And you think that would accomplish what? Are you really this juvenile?
"Please give me an example of how an intelligent being can design the life that we know without being considered supernatural. Thank you.
Isn't mankind on the verge of designing completely new living beings? Are you saying that men are supernatural?
"There’s no need to apologize to me. I’m probably younger than you as it is."
That much is rather obvious from the juvenile 'argument' posted above. Glad you finally caught up.
"I do indeed have a point, though – there's a search engine called Google, and a few keywords can direct you to an introductory biology textbook of your choosing. Do not rely on me to do all the hard work for you."
Already done it. Already know that there is no evidence that uniquely supports evolution over creation. You would do well to take your own advice instead of using the typical naturalist hand-waving generalizations.
Go ahead, find me a piece of evidence (not an interpretation of evidence) that uniquely supports evolution over creation.
We'll see if you have the critical-thinking skills to be able to tell the difference. My bet is that it's teaching-time for you.
It's obvious neither of us can convince the other.
You're a creationist (..."evolution over creation", your words), and I'm not.
Biology has rebuked creationism as a junk science. The Supreme Court has ruled that it cannot be taught in the public science classroom (Edwards).
But, this is America, and you're free to believe whatever you want. In closing, please know that I support your right to believe in creationism. Also know that I will not support any attempt on your part to play word games and attempt to get creationism into the public science classroom.
PS:
I'm surprised that you chose to respond to my request with a rhetorical question.
I quote your original post and my response, as follows:
Based on what you wrote, you seem to think that both Judge Jones and Professor Minnich are mistaken. Don't tell me, tell the professor. If your anger made you unable to see that, my apologies.