Evolution, religion, and ignorance.

[Esquilax]

You're displaying your own lack of understanding by asking this simplistic question. As noted above, the word has a variety of meanings. I accept some of those meanings. I reject others, reason being that I haven't seen compelling scientific evidence supporting them.

Even in the definition you posted there was a definition, and then three paragraphs of refining. Your first paragraph contained the definition, two had additional explanation, the third explored the largely arbitrary micro/macro distinction- and if anyone would like to assert that there's any significant difference in the mechanisms of macro-evolution then they can present evidence that this is the case, like any other scientific claim- and the fourth corrected the "evolution= abiogenesis" misconception, and the common ancestry inference.

To characterize any of those as additional definitions is just absurd. I will, however, concede that my question could have been broader, to encompass those weird "micro, not macro" believers. Perhaps a third question: to what extent do you accept evolution, and why?