CRR writes:
...Darwin took a whole book to discuss his theory and ague his case but many people (e.g. Kerkut, Coyne, Gould, Weintraub) have given definitions of one paragraph or less....
I had a look at what your first source (in the brackets) actually wrote. He never defined the ToE. What he defined were the 'Special Theory of Evolution' and also the 'General Theory of Evolution'. Didn't even bother to check the rest of your sources after you not telling the truth about what your first source actually wrote.
From what Kerkut wrote in 1960.
Kerkut writes:
There is a theory which states that many living animals can be observed over the course of time to undergo changes so that new species are formed. This can be called the ‘Special Theory of Evolution’ and can be demonstrated in certain cases by experiments. On the other hand, there is the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the ‘General Theory of Evolution’ and the evidence that supports it is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis.
His book is free to download.
http://webmindset.net/...9/implications-of-the-evolution.pdf. He didn't define the ToE.
And also remember that the book was published in 1960; years before any organism's DNA was fully sequenced (1977) and the first organism's RNA could only fully be sequenced years after that.
Edited by Pressie, : Double "be" in last sentence.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.