Is evolution a fact?

Evolutionists say that evolution is a fact. You read and hear this a lot; but what does it mean? The word fact is tossed around as breezily as salad greens but in actuality facts are rare creatures; more rare than spotted owls. (Some philosophers even deny that one of them exists.)

- Our theme for today will be; "what is a fact?"

- If E. is a fact what would this mean? How can we unpack this sentence to get at it's real essence? How can we translate it into logical form?
- Let's try.

a. a fact is a claim that is true
b. evolutionary theory consists of a collection of claims.
c. all claims made by E. theory are claims that are true.

- I think that's accurate. The trouble with it is that I don't see any reason to believe it. In my opinion many claims made by E. theorists are false. (This has often been the case in the past.)

- Claims that contradict each other can't both be true. Many of the claims (propositions) made by E. theorists contradict each other; therefore not all claims made by E. theory are true. If this is true, evolution is Not a fact. (When I say evolution I'm referring to particles to pineapples to professors evolution; so called macro-evolution.)

- When you unpack this bit of bumper sticker rhetoric you see how fallacious it is. (Rhetoric is often a cloak to hide problems; but it is more often a way to smuggle false claims into a debate.)

- If we were to rewrite this claim in a logically true way it would read; 'some claims made by evolutionists are true, and therefore some are false.' Well; we can see why no one writes in a logically honest way :=)

- You can see by the above that the less one knows about E. theory (and about biology, etc.) the easier it is to believe this claim (E. is a fact) is true. (i.e. if you aren't familiar with the theory you won't know how often claims contradict one another.)

- The unfortunate circumstance we find ourselves in is that the Origins debate has been taken over by people who prefer to throw around empty rhetoric and wave placards, than engage in intelligent conversation.

Notes;
1. Several times in the last couple years I've seen people (e.g. Jerry Fodor) admit that natural selection isn't the great engine of information it's long been claimed to be. They admit it can do little or nothing to create new information. How the greatest evidence for E. can be false, but E. still be a fact I don't know. This doesn't stop them from insisting E. is still a fact however. (I think it's more like a weed myself.)
- The materialist has no alternative but to claim E. is a fact. I think this means that like death and taxes, it ain't goin' away.
2. Our theme for today will be; "what is a fact?" (Far more profound than the question, "what is the sound of one hand clapping?")