Creation/evolution3

[Thumpalumpacus]

As defined by merrium Webster:
1
a : an outward sign : indication
b : something that furnishes proof : testimony; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
2
: one who bears witness; especially : one who voluntarily confesses a crime and testifies for the prosecution against his accomplices

Now put the two definitions together, and you have an authenticated meaning of the term "empirical evidence" and not the made up crap most of you believe to be the defination.

Nonsense. You're not under oath, and subject to penalties for perjury, which is the clear meaning of the condition "legally submitted".

Your claim is not "testimony." Your claim is simply a bald claim.

Here one you might want to try: Topical, as in do you think you can manage a post that is 'Topical?'

Pointing out your ignorance is indeed topical. You've been corrected on the spelling of article, have been presented citations showing that article is the correct spelling, and yet you refuse to acknowledge your error, and indeed dig your heels in and insist you are right. That obdurate ignorance, running away from facts presented to you, is germane to every thread you post in, because it shows you to be someone who cannot admit even the smallest error; a disingenuous ignoramus incapable of learning and unwilling to bow to facts.

That is very topical. You got any other complaints, Roget?