Personally, I find the book fascinating. And as I probe a little deeper into the meaning of the word theorem, it is becoming clear that there are multiple definitions, depending on the discipline involved. And give the Wikipedia definition of a theorem re: science, it seems to me that Dr. Gitt’s use of the word is appropriate to the field of knowledge he is pursuing.
I'm sure. Allow me to repost a golden oldie of mine from your earlier thread that announced the previous chapter in this series. It is just as apropos here:
Leaving aside for a moment the fact that AiG is a crackpot site for creation rationalization, the series that you post is an attempt to ascribe a nonsensical philosophical underpinning to science. In reality, science is a rational, practical process of observation, conclusion, and revision. Its conclusions and predictive capabilities are astoundingly accurate. “Philosophizing” science, i.e., claiming that its undeniable accuracy and fairness derives from anything other than practical realism, is simply an attempt by scurrilous, dishonest authors to recast science as faith.
Oh, one more thing--evolution and Christianity are perfectly compatible.