" 
 :::: Your threats and phrases like ""You don't really know shit..."" has no place in a civil discussion, your continuous inability to came up with the single source (dictionary) to support your flawed thoughts about the meaning of the word conclusion is obvious to everybody. Who do you think you are to just come here and state something about meaning the word and insist you don't need evidence to support your flawed logic? Moreover, even if you would be an esteemed lexicographer you would need a reliable source to back up your claims about the meaning of the words. Unsupported nonsenses are not enough! You don't even understand the fundamental Wikipedia policies asking for asserting facts where is no serious dispute. For these reason it is possible to state in the article Evolution: ""Evolutionary biologists document the fact that evolution occurs, and also develop and test theories which explain its causes."" even if there are plenty of religious zealots and almost half of American public uneducated in the issue. It does not matter here. Documented fact owerhelmingly accepted by rational people remain the fact. In fact, you are not competent to counter the fact presented in unanimous ruling Florida Appeals Court ""the issue so far beyond dispute that it would be irrational to hold otherwise"". Thus it is obvious you are irrational person unable to accept facts and mandatory Wikipedia policies.    
 "