Who Owns the Standard Definition of Evolution

No. There is a very consistent set of definitions across the discipline but no one definition is cut into the marble and etched in gold.Read Ernst W. Mayr. Learn that name. He has defined evolution many times in many ways. Why? You looking for something to rant and rail against? As you can see from the responses your understanding leaves a lot still to be learned. Understanding evolution at anything but the pop-culture soundbite level takes years of study. Takes a lot of work to understand the numerous processes involved in biological evolution. Most on here have been at this for decades.What do you hope to learn, find, achieve with this question? How can we help?

Bad start.Theory is the umbrella term used to house all the documented evidence for the various operations of a proven studied process. A hypothesis is something totally different. Hypothesis is but a guess yet to be tested. Evolution is philosophically way beyond the hypothesis point. It is held by the preponderance of the evidence. That means the evidence is too overwhelming for the conclusion to be wrong. Not having studied the subject I’m thinking you are yet unaware of just how much proof of evolution the world holds. If you are trying to say that “evolution is not science so it’s not proven so it's not real” then I’m afraid that discussion was settled decades ago. That side lost, big time.Also, your view of ‘replication’ in science is way off-base. Science does not require physical replication of long-ago historical events but only replication (consensus) of a study’s conclusions. Lots of different guys looking at the the same old rocks and drawing the same conclusions. The combination of physical evidence from the lab and the consensus that the old historical non-reproducible data is interpreted properly is all the evidence necessary for a scientific theory.Evolution has risen to be one of the most evidenced theories ever devised by man. If you want to discuss the various processes and what the evidence shows then fine, ask away. If you want to claim our understanding is wrong and The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis is bogus, then there is nothing to discuss. You already lost. That's because you don't understand the history behind those ever improving definitions.You do not seem to have the knowledge to understand science or evolution. How can you debate when so unarmed? Why should anyone debate someone who doesn't know the subject?

Yes we understand genetics and pretty much all it's processes. We can see the genes, know what they do, what happens when a gene breaks and how/why such can mutate.We know this so well we know, with certainty, how the individual molecules and atoms behave in the process your DNA uses to replicate. Every bond, every atom.You have heard of genetically modified foods. Genetic alteration of genes in stem cells implanted to control disease.Yes, we know this stuff.

What substantiated? Every farmer in forever knows this. You say you have seen evidence. You didn't understand it? It was not in the right format? What substantiated? Your kids almost, but not quite, look like you. Not every puppy in the liter is a clone. I think that 'descent with modification' is well substantiated.If you want to discuss how this 'modification' takes place then take a look first at meiosis of the germline cells then at mutation vectors. We can go from there.Also, realize that Evolution works on populations not individuals. You will want to understand the concept of a gene pool and allele frequency within that pool. You can't adequately discuss anything evolution without these concepts in place. You're looking at the wrong data or misinterpreting what you see or expect to see. Common with highly complex systems when a person's knowledge is limited and wrong. First understand that evolution is not a process but hundreds of processes in unison and in conflict, creating both life and death.

What are you talking about? The preponderance is formed by many thousands, millions, of data points. Chart populations over time. The changes in allele frequency is a major process in evolution. It is the conglomeration of the data that is overwhelming, not any single data point. If you want to see a single data point for evolution take a look in the mirror then get yourself a statistics class and study population dynamics. And study nested hierarchies. They are vital in understanding descent in evolution.What did you expect to see? New animals pop into existence? What are you looking for that would show you evolution?

But not the same species. You know there are different species of corn? We modify the genes of one species and make a whole new species of corn. That is directed evolution. Like selective breeding on the farm.When a gene change happens whether natural or artificial the allele frequency for the population has been changed to add the new variants. If those variants come over time to appear in larger portions of the population that population has evolved.Change in allele frequency. Evolution. Lots of different definitions for evolution. All of them correct.

Why? Do you think you can comprehend the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon by looking at one scatter plot?It appears you do not comprehend the static single item of the scientific method. How can you hope to comprehend the complex interplay of thousands of different process like evolution by seeing one example? It's a dog. Big deal.Can you see the frequency charts for the dog population? Can you read the charts of the dog population to determine changes in the allele frequency? Can you see those charts spread over multiple dozens of generations? That is a clear demonstrative example of evolution.If you're expecting a single proof case easy on the mind without too much thought then you are in the wrong world.

No one is trying to refute biblical creation. It is a religious fantasy that its adherents themselves refuted​ over a century ago. No one is going to expend the bandwidth arguing to defeat a religious absurdity. Lifeforms evolve by a complex process involving genetic modification of the gene pool over many thousands of generations. The mechanism is modification of alleles and their selection/deletion from the gene pool by the environment.Yes, the mechanism can and has been observed in operation and reproduced in the lab. BS. You do not understand the conduct of the scientific disciplines in this world. Only the idiocy and stupidity of religion insists on such terms. The deceit is by politically and religiously motivated groups trying to deny what the universe has shown us. It is that deceit to the public that seeks to mar the scientific findings. See the question immediately above.You lie about impossible restrictions on a discipline you know nothing about and then complain when they can't be met. Typical errant religious thinking.Your understandings of evolution and of science are woefully deficient. You need to go back to school (yes, a school where they can give you the semesters of information you cannot get in an internet forum) and pay attention this time. The discipline of Evolution is one of the most well documented well understood mechanisms at work in our universe. Only the desperately religious and the hopelessly ignorant attempt to deny its reality.

Because the religious stupidity in the face of overwhelming reality is quite boring. You are recycling old creationist arguments that were destroyed decades ago. That's not flak. That's laughter.

Twisty, twisty in the mind. Not overwhelming for me but for you.The reality of evolution, the evidence in favor, overwhelms your religious fantasies against. Your views on this subject, along with many others, are demonstrably wrong. Yet, you insist your fantasy is right. You live in your own delusional world. Religious = delusional.Your talking snake doesn't. Delusion (religion) always fails in the face of universal reality.

Wishful thinking on your part. Tons of evidence that you refuse to see. As usual, your religious fantasy cannot stand before the reality.

You are a religious nutjob trying to dabble in a science thread. Religion is your motivation for being here. As Granny Magda noted in Message 115 your projection problem is showing again.

Yeah, my IQ is so low ...How low is it?My IQ is so low I don't believe in talking snakes.

You can't handle details yet. You still need basic understanding.Evidence for evolution (article) | Khan Academy In your fantasy world of snakes and ribs and super-intelligent apples this may be so. But in this universe, as she has shown us many many times, facts are tentative. The available evidence shows quite starkly that the ToE is considerably more accurate than your bible. The other great benefit of ToE over your fantasy tome is that as research grows we can correct the diagrams to reflect the new data. You can't do that with ANY religion without starting a bloody war.Those diagrams are as accurate as the whole discipline of hundreds of smart guys can make them. It is the best the intellect of mankind has to offer and YOU have NO standing, intellect, education to challenge any of them.

You being here trying to defeat evolution is motivated by your religion. You are a religious actor. I'm in the right spot.Wow! That projection problem of yours really is severe.