The Theory of Evolution is False

I look forward to hearing your arguments. And now, in to the debate. The Theory:The theory of evolution is- (according to medical-dictionary. thefreedictionary. com)1. A continuing process of change from one state or condition to another or from one to another. 2. The theory that groups of organisms change with passage of time, mainly as a result of natural selection, so that descendants differ morphologically and physiologically from their ancestors. Problem with the definitionNot only is the theory flawed, but the definition itself is. The definition states "a continuing process of change," when in fact, it is not continuing. Evolution has actually stopped for over 600 generations! Now, correct me if I'm incorrect and absurd when I say this, but there has been no cases of humans evolving in the past thousand plus years. Another excerpt from the definition, "groups of organisms change with the passage of time," is also false. No group of organisms have changed, like I stated above, in the past one thousand plus years. Not only is the theory itself flawed, but its very own definition. How did evolution start? Yes, this is a question to my opponent. I would like you, to please, explain the first living cell to me, considering no other scientist logically can. Also, please explain what caused the cell to form, and what caused it to evolve. Many of the theories supporters state, (abovetopsecret. com) that lightning struck a pond of water, causing several molecules to combine in such a random way by which chance resulted in a living cell. This cell then evolved in to higher life forms. This view is now immature to the degree of being ridiculous. The most technologically advanced modern science laboratory is unable to create a living cell, considering the fact that they do have resources available to them such as electricity and water. The scientists still are unable to create a single left-hand protein molecule as found in all animals. So, I ask of you to please explain the first cell on Earth to me. Evolution is a theoryThe fact that evolution is still considered a scientific theory suggests one thing, it cannot be proven true. If it was certain to be proven with out a doubt true, it would be a scientific law. There is a difference. A scientific theory is a guess or belief that something is true, not necessarily correct. The theory may be supported by an association or group of people, and also may not. A scientific law is something that has been proven scientifically correct and true in numerous accounts. So I ask of you and the audience, if evolution is indeed scientifically proven authentic, then why is it still examined and considered a scientific theory? If it was to be found accurate on numerous accounts, not just one, then it would be considered a law; but it has not. To finish up my opening statements, I would like to state the logically quote, stating "you can't get something from nothing" Life is not one colossal, arbitrary coincidence. The flawed theory of evolution is scientifically false, which is why it remains a theory. I would like to finish off by a former atheist's , and departed evolution supporter's , quote on evolution, "A man feels wet when he falls in to water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet, because a fish is a water animal" -C. S. Lewis Resources used in the previous statementmedical-dictionary. freedictionary. comabovetopsecret. com Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis