I am not attempting to be contentious here-I simply want to understand. It is my understanding that there is more than enough evidence to demonstrate the reality of evolution. If that is the case why would I be wrong to describe evolution as an aspect of the physical world established by empirical observation? (Or would I be wrong? As you will have gathered I am not a scientist!). Is the answer that I am not observing a thing but a process and evolution is a hypothesis developed to explain this process?