Bio-evolution lacks both a dynamic and an object

bio-evolution lacks both a dynamic and an object http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/8c116c87fe4e497d?tvc=1

Granted, bio-evolution doesn't yet cut-it as real science, lacking a fundamental operator ( such as d/dx ) to express the verbally stated concept of "selection".

But almost as bad ... Wikipedia has a curt discussion summarizing the disagreement as to the OBJECT of selection.

"....... A unit of selection is a biological entity within the hierarchy of biological organisation (e.g. genes, cells, individuals, groups, species) that is subject to natural selection. For several decades there has been intense debate among evolutionary biologists about the extent to which evolution has been shaped by selective pressures acting at these different levels. This debate has been as much about what it means to be a unit of selection as it has about the relative importance of the units themselves, i.e., is it group or individual selection that has driven the evolution of altruism? When it is noted that altruism reduces the fitness of individuals, it is difficult to see how altruism has evolved within the context of Darwinian selection acting on individuals; ..."

Pretty bad, eh for a chatty group of 'naturalist' pretenders to the higher courts of understanding? The evolutionary material is presented with all the pretensions of a science ( sociologists do that too ), but underneath the "just-so" stories it's gutless - no robust dynamic and no agreed-upon object. For all we know, the actual "unit of selection" may be a single hydrogen bond in some obscure sugar. Nice work Charlie, Dawkins will be proud of you.