The article you object to names four criteria for objective science:
1. Theories must be falsifiable.
2. Theories must be able to predict.
3. Experiments must be repeatable.
4. Integrable and Non-contradictory. (Must fit and not contradict established science.)
Now, if you want to call evolution science, there is no objection, however, if that kind of investigation, which I think geology, and psychology, are similarly, "scientific," in the rigor and methods, but do not meet all the criteria of objective science above, then we are going to need a new term for those sciences which do meet the criteria. Maybe we could call all disciplines that are are scientific in their approach, and use as many of the criteria above as possible, science, but those sciences which meet all of the above criteria could be called pure objective science.
What I would object to is the suggestion that evolution, which cannot meet the falsifiability or repeatablility criteria, be classified as science in the same way organic chemistry's quantitative and qualitive analysis, which meet all the criteria, are, for example.
plusone asked: Can you devise an experiment to prove (or by its failure, disprove) the idea of evolution? If no experiment is possible, does that mean evolution is not a theory?
Technically, evolution is a hypothesis until it is proven with the above criteria, that is, until it is demonstrated to predict, be verifiable by experiment it can only pass if true (be falsifiable), and others are able to repeat the experiment. Cosmology, and all parts of astronomy dealing with the distant past suffer from the same limitations evolution suffers from. That does not make them less scientific, or less serious, but teir conclusions cannot technically be called theories (only hypothses) until proven by the above criteria. If we choose to call them theories, we will need another term for those hypotheses which have been proven by the above criteria.
Hank
I think you're raising the issue of the distinction between the experimental sciences (physics, etc.) and the historical sciences (including but not limited to astronomy, geology, anthropology, paleontology, climatology, archaeology, criminology, cosmology and evolution). In another thread we've been beating the issue to death. You can pick up the discussion HERE.