Yes, that explains a lot, that must be why a Federal Judge ordered the removal of a label form school textbooks in Georgia that states that "The Theory of Evolution is only a theory and not fact". Some wish to give a "Theory" the same value of truth as a "Fact" by making the slight of hand semantical claim that a theory presents facts. If this were true the product of these facts also would be a fact, but the real FACT is 0 + 0 still equals 0. A theory is only a speculation, no matter how one wishes to dress it, if it were indeed a fact of science there would be a LAW OF EVOLUTION, not an unprovable idea dressed in the garments of science actual that is based upon empirical evidence. Many claim thus but none as of yet have produced none. Sure, there is empirical evidence concerning "evolution" but all such empirical evidence is found within the real science of microbiology and biogenesis, not in the arena of macroevolution and abiogenesis if there is empirical evidence of facts would someone please present them, by not robbing them from the confirmed theory of microevolution that has never been proven to break the species barrier of biogensis.

I would like for anyone to present the empirical proof all along the time line of the supposed theory of evolution. Many claim they have such all the way to the big bang that provides empirical evidence for the gestation of life coming about from random natural circumstance. If this is so would someone please present the empirical evidence for the following. We shall begin from the inverted process that Darwinian proponents take and begin with the Big Bang that states the universe is the product of natural science without intelligent design of anything.

a.) Please present the empirical evidence for the mass/matter that gestated the "Big Bang". To claim that the universe is the product of nature there had to be a cause and effect as defined by the laws of physics. Please provide the evidence that the gestation of the big bang was not a product of creation. As defined by other theories (E=Mc2) Time and Space did not begin until after the Big Bang. If this is true then whatever gestated the Big Bang exists outside of time. To be a pure product of nature one would have to come to the absurd conclusion that what ever gestated the Big Bang created itself(it created itself before it existed..really?), or it is eternal and has always existed. If this were true according to the laws of thermodynamics the entire universe would be the same temperature as the universe having already existed would have expended it usable energy (entropy), But as evidenced the universe could not be eternal as the Sun is not the same temperature as the earth...is it?
So the empirical evidence points to the theory that the universe is winding down and expending energy and will one day come to end. Logic dictates that if something has an ending it also had to have a beginning. Please explain this beginning in empirical science without creation being involved.

b.) Next, would someone please present the empirical evidence, not hypothetical speculation, as to how Hydrogen mixed with smaller amounts of Helium began cooling to produce solid masses of entirety different elements, such as iron, nickel,...etc. And magically produced not only the many suns of billions of galaxies but many solid matter planents. Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

c.) Please present the empirical evidence that life was produced from the magically produced solid matter that had cooled to produce the earth, sun, and solar system. Also present the evidence of just how this life once that it was created, existed as being the first and only life without another source of biological fuel (food) for billions of years until it magically evolved by gaining knowledge to morph into a superior or larger product (without having another life source to draw this knowledge from).

d.) Please present the empirical proof that would explain the sudden appearance of macrobiological life without any apparent ancestral lineage found in the fossils before the Cambrian explosion. Not hypothetical speculation that only evolutionists can consider as valid as claiming that apparently these evidences are hidden in the evolutionary fossil remains despite the fact that mircobiological life fossils was found before the appearance of Marco life(yet it must be there despite the clear evidence of microlife, marco is still unobservable, and the check is in the mail). Proceed please. Here is a link to start Cambrian explosion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

e.) Please present the empirical evidence of science that suggests that macrolife has ever evolved from one species to another. Provide the reproducible evidence of experiment that can be observed in nature that has proven a valid transistional life fossil having been found to evolved outside the species barrier offered by the theory of biogenesis and mircoevolution( that which happens on a small scale yet is contained with the species of like kind, which is contained in all biological life and its DNA to allow for adaptation to environment). Microevolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Biogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

f.) Please provide the empirical evidence that suggests life can be a product of non-living matter. Show the evidence of science where this has been reproducible in experimentation or observed in nature. As I said before take any example of life, either plant or animal, disassemble it in the lab and place all the parts back together and produce life again in that subject. Proceed please. Produce these evidence which you boast of having in the facts of theory that must conclude that this theory is correct. I'll be waiting for empirical evidence not that which is produced from between some secular scientists ears but that which is reproducible and observable, "I'll be waiting for those that do not consider themselves butterheads to present this claimed evidence" Ralph