An evolutionary hypothesis- why "evolution" is a useless heuristic

In the thread The advantage of experience over ignorance- my response to desk jockeys Elsberry and Wilkins part II, Zachriel, I mean Olorin, offers the following as an evolutionary hypothesis:

[2] You continue to claim that there is no testable hypothesis. Well, here it is: evolution proceeds by heritable variation, overfecundity(sic), and natural selection. (“Natural” selection is used vaguely at times. I mean it to include environmental, sexual, group, and other forms of selection.) This is the basic theory that has been tested and confirmed for a century and a half.

1- Variation to what? Notice no specifics. And that is because "evolution" doesn't have any. It is a vague premise that is useless because of this vagueness.

And this vagueness reflects ignorance on the part of those who accept the theory.

IOW ignorance is a conerstone of the theory of evolution.

2. heritable selection and fecudity are the processes that make up natural selection.

IOW the above "hypothesis" reads evolution proceeds by natural selection and natural selection.

Which means this person who claims to have scientific qualifications is nothing but a dolt.



But I do thank Zachriel/ Olorin for proving my point- that "evolution" is too vague to be of any use.