[DesertSapper]

Nice try but a weak counter-point. I give you a 2-out-of-10 on the comeback scale.

Prove: To establish the truth or validity of by presentation of argument or evidence.

Using the generally-accepted definition above and the fact that we can observe the validity of "micro-evolution" (natural selection and adaptation within the "kind") . . . I say . . . yep! "provable" works quite well.

Ignorant of this pseudo-science called Dawinism/macro-evolution I am not.

Your turn!

[Dimensio]

Using the generally-accepted definition above and the fact that we can observe the validity of "micro-evolution" (natural selection and adaptation within the "kind") . . . I say . . . yep! "provable" works quite well.

Observing the validity of "micro-evolution" doesn't prove any scientific theories. Scientific theories are not proven, and your attempt to use rhetoric to distract from the original point does not change this.

The only people who ask that a scientific theory be "provable" are those who do not understand science.