The global warming faithful have begun to re-define the term to mean anything they say it means, so any weather anomaly can be said (by them) to be caused by anthropogenic activity.
In the same way, the evolution zealots have begun to re-define the term to mean anything they say it means, so any change or adaptation can be said (by them) to be evolution. No one disputes that adaption takes place, that's part of The Design, but the unproven part is whether or not one species evolves into a completely different species. The religion of evolution tries to disingenuously equate adaption with evolution, and have suckered many uninformed into believing that they are equal.
The global warming faithful have begun to re-define the term to mean anything they say it means, so any weather anomaly can be said (by them) to be caused by anthropogenic activity.
In the same way, the evolution zealots have begun to re-define the term to mean anything they say it means, so any change or adaptation can be said (by them) to be evolution. No one disputes that adaption takes place, that's part of The Design, but the unproven part is whether or not one species evolves into a completely different species. The religion of evolution tries to disingenuously equate adaption with evolution, and have suckered many uninformed into believing that they are equal.
Global warming is a separate issue. No one doubts that the climate changes. The issue there is that socialist ideologues saw there an opportunity to try to mash socialism down our throats by trying to link human activity to natural climate change. Because politicians direct money to anthropogenic climate change research rather than to other types of research, some scientists (who should know better) started throwing the phrase "because of climate change" as a cause of just about every observation. In some cases, they also discuss what the actual causes might be; in other cases, they don't even discuss potential causes. I've seen scientists who do this at conferences and read it in many scientific papers. Different issue, different background.
OTOH, the theory of evolution is based in scientific observation, and revised as new information is learned. As far as I can tell, it is apolitical. Scientists use it just as one would expect scientists to use any scientific theory.
Science =/= religion.