Breh, that doesn't make any sense. So his theory can be 100% correct (it is) but because it's called Evolution and a bunch of racists used it to suit their agenda you can't get behind it? Evolution is a synonym for "change". His theory is about organisms changing over time, it isn't just about adaptation, there are random mutations as well. The title is fine, you're nitpicking beyond belief dude.
evolution occurred though. Just go look at something like the evolution of eyes. Eyes gradually developed from a very simple form, to a much much much more complex one.
also, evolution and adaptation are two different things. both of them occur. So why should the theory be called one word over the other? Evolution is a change in population overtime, Adaptation is something a singular animal can develop. Whether the adaptation is beneficial or not determines whether it will be passed to offspring and then eventually the entire population will change (evolution)
But when talking about an adaptation we're talking about a singular instance of it expressed by one organism. Evolution occurs when the trait benefits survival and is passed on to subsequent generations to the point that an entire population of things has said adaptation. But we could also be talking about an adaptation that isn't beneficial, so it only occurred once, which is obviously different from evolution.
Wait. You were just telling me your problem with the theory of evolution was the term of evolution itself. Your logic behind that is because racists took that term and turned it into thinking they were more highly evolved? Would them thinking they were more highly "adapted" change things at all? They would've just said white people are better adapted at *insert racist idea here*. Darwin was anti-slavery and said in his book that there weren't differences large enough to constitute separate species' of humans between the skin colors. And yes, in 2015 his use of the word savages are obviously offensive. But look at what year he wrote that book, and think about it from this perspective: during that time the biggest architectural/industrial cities were european/american. Aboriginals and many places in Africa were tribal in nature. Obviously, it's a little hard to create a thriving civilization when your continent is exploited of resources and people by outside invading forces, but to an 1800s European man these people were more savage and less "civilized". I'm not saying he's right but for a man from a time when almost everyone was bigoted, ignorant, and racist, he was pretty advanced.
a broken record, folks. @iLLaV3 you dapped this man up bruh, he doesn't even understand evolution
