"Theory" and "Evolution"

Streak's comment hit home on a good point- the use of terminology. It's interesting how his point in his post about how historical and scientific expertise is so quickly cast aside by anyone who feels it violates a religious belief of theirs can also be applied to the word "theory" itself. How many times have you heard someone say when referring to evolution, "Well, it is just a "theory""? He make a nice clarification on the scientific use of the word.

Another clarification that doesn't get pointed out often enough is the definition of the term "evolution". Here's one definition and an expanded comment:

the historical development of a biological group (as a race or species) : PHYLOGENY b : a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations

What I think is absolutely verifiable is evolution as defined above. The discrepancy and conflict arises when "common ancestor" theory comes into the discussion i.e. we all evolved from a common ancestor or common atoms of carbon getting together. I think there can be some discussion regarding "how it all started". No matter how far you go back, there's a leap of "faith" as to where it all came from to start with. Evolution as defned above is as observabble and verifiable.