It goes without saying that science is never settled in an absolute sense. Settled science can always be overturned by a new discovery.
The theory of evolution is about as settled as anything can be in science. In a way, the theory of evolution is a more settled than the theory of gravitation, something which no one doubts.
You Know, TNO, upon reflection, I gave you credit for having more intelligence than to make a comment like this one..........although I consider you to be politically misguided, I've credited you as an articulate, reasonably smart person, with well above average research and communication skills.........however........
Back when I was a postdoc, teaching Physics classes to undergrads, the professors would categorize students making statements like this as "fuzzy thinkers". In science, a "fuzzy thinker" is one who for whatever reason (religion, political ideology, or just plain stubbornness) arrives at a conclusion on as issue "first", based on how they "feel" about it, and then proceeds to expend all of his/her energy rushing to the library to find the least bit of out-of context "evidence" in order to fight off challenges to what, in their mind, has become set in concrete.
Students striving to become well versed in scientific principles look at even the most established concept with a jaundiced eye........forever skeptical, a good scientist never allows his/her outside opinions color their consideration of a scientific issue/problem. As I mentioned to you in a long-ago thread on another topic, many of my professors, when I was coming up in academia were outright Marxists, and many Athiests, but it was never allowed to influence their research, nor did they begin consideration of a theory with either their politics or religion (or lack thereof) as the remotest part of their work. They were scientists, first and foremost, and their Atheism, Marxism, or any other influence was left out of the process. I might hear about it over coffee at lunch at the Dean's house, but never in the lab or classroom.
You demonstrate this flaw in thinking here as well, as you frantically Google for the smallest tidbit if information to dispute a piece of a presented concept, rather than stepping back, and looking at the topic with a skeptical scientific approach, organizing your thoughts, and presenting the well thought-out, organized, and articulate argument that I know you are capable of........without letting your politics, or "religion" color your presentation or thought process.
If, after careful self-analysis, you can't arrive at such a place, perhaps PolySci or Philosophy is your thing, and threads involving science, religion, and related topics should be overlooked. Just a suggestion......
I think that it is great that you have joined this discussion, as your positions have certainly created great interest from the membership, but you are capable of better.......let's see it.......
doc