>So you have letters.

Not bragging just a futile attempt to stop you talking down to me in the same patronising way you do to Pete.

Yes, you are bragging. You want me to brag too? Well, I wouldn't do that, but you are very unwise to pull the "I've got letters..." stunt with people you don't know. Futile, vainglorious and positively counter-productive. And I might remind you that the whole tone of your responses to me, as in the past, is incredibly patronising. So cast out the plank, eh?   

>I've already expanded above on why I think evolution is true

No you haven't. In your post of 13 Mar 11 - 08:09 PM you simply reiterated the statement and in the following post you summarised the evidence in support of "Darwin's theory". You make a distinction between Evolution and The Theory of Evolution but you seem to have trouble distinguishing them yourself. I am no nearer understanding what you mean by "Evolution is true.".

Then simply commence thinking instead of trying to come up with the next clever, patronising thing to come up with. I've actually made it very clear. I didn't summarise any evidence at all. I indicated the main facets of the evidence, in fossils, morphology, genetics, anatomy, developmental biology and cellular biochemistry. Go and read a good modern account of the theory of evolution (yes, wrong name but why change now) and look at the evidence yourself instead of blathering on with your head in the stratosphere about the philosophy of science.   

>And I say that evolution is true, and I don't give a damn whether you believe it or not.

Good Grief! Now you want me to "believe" things as well. Science isn't about belief, that's religion.

Complete cobblers. Just to satisfy your pedantic disease, let me rephrase, thus. "And I say that evolution is true, and I don't give a damn whether you believe me or not."

>Show me evidence that undermines, in any real sense, evolution.

Do you mean evolution or the theory? It's hard to tell because you seem to use the terms interchangeably in that paragraph.

Either, both or neither. I don't give a damn. Just stop waffling tiresomely on and address the substantive issue for once. If you have evidence that demonstrates that evolution is not true, let's have it. Piss or get off the pot before it overflows with cod-philosophical diarrhoea.

Let me make it clear (in the vain hope that you will stop attacking me for something I am not saying). The Theory of Evolution is one of the pinnacles of human achievement. It vastly increases our understanding of the natural world and our place in it. It is so overwhelmingly supported by the evidence that it is unlikely to be significantly changed in it's major points.

No, it doesn't "increase our understanding, etc. etc." It explains life on earth in all its beauty and complexity. It is as simple as that. It does far more than you give it credit for and it does so by making incredibly few assumptions. Your last sentence shows that you really agree with me after all, which completely betrays your motives in making these irritating posts.

But, as you concede, as a theory it cannot be described as "true".

I have conceded nothing. I have told you directly and honestly what I think. As a scientific theory, evolution is perpetually open to question and modification. But that does not mean that evolution is not basically the true story of life on Earth.

What can be described as true? Facts, observations, measurements. The sun is shining in Cornwall fits that well enough.

How perverse of you. I told you the sun was shining in Cornwall and you didn't ask for evidence, now you tell me it's a good example of truth. I will refrain from accusing you of having religious faith in my pronouncements.