To make this claim, you were forced to misrepresent what I wrote.<quoted text>
I never said that. I said you (and others) are stretching what we have learned far beyond its limitations. Much as Christians might equate the probability of a historical Jesus to proof He was God.
So you aren't speaking to me, but to some straw man you have in your head.
I'll repeat what I wrote, that you seemed to have misunderstood:
Evolution is the theoretical framework for all biological sciences. It unifies all biological phenomena under one overarching explanatory umbrella. This isn't to say that every single bit of research in biological sciences must speak to or test evolutionary theory. Phenomena are examined at different levels of analysis from proximate to ultimate, but all ultimately derive from the process of evolution.
I further wrote that all evidence we have backs up evolution. I never used the words "prove" - that was you misrepresenting me. If you disagree on this point, put down some evidence that doesn't back up evolution - moreover, I wrote that evolution had never been disproved, not once. You had issues with this as well, but were not able to clarify why.
Scientific theories are "confirmed" not "proven." Science never talks of "proof" but of "smoking guns" - evidence that clearly demonstrates a hypothesis.
So if you stop misrepresenting my words, you'll see that I am not being dogmatic with regards to science.