The judge's charge is to weigh the evidence and testimony. This is a reality-based, not a metaphysical, exercise.
PS: what definition of "metaphysics" are you using here?
His...
I gave the definition of metaphysical several days ago.
The only issue here is that you want to use a definition of 'concrete evidence' that includes metaphysical explanations of a fact and I don't.
That is one of the main methods used to make 'evolution' appear stronger than it is. Talk about imaginary past events as though they are real. It fools the little evos every time.
That's why you are confused. It's not that difficult to understand.
In reality, the concrete evidence is the same with the only difference being the interpretations that are layered over that evidence.
Creation is equally valid as an explanation of the evidence as evolution. The evos are terrified to admit that fact though because they realize that they would lose all credibility if it became widely known.
Hence, the huge fight to conceal the metaphysical nature of evolution.