This sentence, while seemingly impervious to English translation, seems to be repeating the same old canard about evolution being *just a theory* and therefore not like all the rest of science, which is *verified*.
SO?
"This sentence, while seemingly impervious to English translation, seems to be repeating the same old canard about evolution being *just a theory* and therefore not like all the rest of science, which is *verified*."(CG)
"SO?"(WKB)"
The problem is that it implies a false level of uncertainty regarding evolution. It is an attempt to use misleading semantics to cast doubt upon evolution, when in fact there is no more doubt with respect to evolution than there is for the rest of science.