Now unless you can prove biological evolution has nothing to do with "the order and course of nature" (which is absurd) - biological evolution does have something to do with cosmology.
Oh boy, the pick-your-definition game! I just love that one. Ok, here's *my* dictionary's definition:
Cosmology: a branch of astronomy that deals with the origin, structure, and space-time relationships of the universe; also : a theory dealing with these matters (Merriam-Webster)Now unless you can prove biological evolution has something to do with "space-time relationships of the universe" (which is absurd) - biological evolution *doesn't* have something to do with cosmology.
So much for the definition game... Most amateur philosophers outgrow that one pretty fast, I see that you haven't yet.
You're right - that was amusing.
Just not in quite the way you intended.
Proving a know-it-all is wrong is fun.
You've got a lot to learn about the nature of "proof", son. And it's a more rigorous thing than just picking the broadest definition you can get your hands on in order to stretch a word beyond any useful meaning (i.e., by your definition and argument, *car repair* is related to cosmology). When a word is expanded that far, any "connection" you've claimed to have demonstrated is a Pyrrhic victory, at most.
Is this a relative of yours?
"There's glory for you!""I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument,' " Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
"The question is, " said Alice, "whether you *can* make words mean so many different things."
-- From Through The Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll
I think that means the word has more than one meaning - therefore your comment that evolution has nothing to do with cosmology is false (all that was needed is one definition - not all of them)
The existence of ONE definition that supports my statement supports my position and disproves your silly absolute statement - I only need one definition to prove my statement - the only way your statement is true is if ALL definitions support it (which is clearly not the case) - maybe that will teach you not to make absolute statements
But it meant something different, then, now didn't it? Or maybe you aren't aware of this.
This is a great example of Orthodox Darwinism. Not only is this clown a know-it-all – he actually believes that Lord God Darwin changed the very meaning of the word “evolution” - like I said, Orthodox Darwinism is more dogma than science.
“In the beginning there was Darwin and his book was the truth (praise be to Darwin) – all hail Lord God Darwin