this is off the discussion two days ago just reply in 60 words with reference

In the article “Evolution as a fact and a theory” by Stephen Gould the author uses an implied thesis to advocate for Evolution theory. Gould makes many points in this article discussing creationism, whether it is a science or not, in comparison to Evolution theory. Gould states that “The rise of creationism is politics, pure and simple; It represents one issue (and by no means the major concern) of the resurgent evangelical right.” He dives into the attacks on evolution theory by creationists in paragraph three where he mentions that creationists misuse the word ‘theory’ and pretend that their methods are scientific. Gould claims “They misuse a popular philosophy of science to argue that they are behaving scientifically in attacking evolution. Yet the same philosophy demonstrates that their own belief is not science, and that ‘scientific creationism’ is a meaningless and self contradictory phrase, an example of what Orwell called ‘newspeak’.”
Gould goes on to define Evolution theory as both fact, in the sense that it is confirmed to the best of physical ability but does not mean absolute certainty, and also a theory. In the article Gould says “Evolutionists have been clear about this distinction between fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred.” Gould mentions that creationism has not developed any new ideas nor is falsifiable through testing, claiming by these standards that creationism is not a science.
Gould’s unspoken thesis seems to be guided towards arguing Evolution theory is a science whereas creationism is not, but it portrays to be. He talks passionately about the science of evolution theory and creationists attacks on evolution theory throughout the majority of the article. He defines science as fact and theory and debunks creationists claim of being a science based on those definitions. The argument he makes is that Evolution theory is a science whereas creationism is not.

Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory," May 1981; from
Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1994, pp. 253-262.