I think evolution must be defined. When "evolution" is applied in science it is something you and I and any scientist, creationist or atheist, can agree on. Everyone agrees that living organisms change over time.
The problem is the idea that this proves DarwinÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s theory about the origin of species or Charles Lyell's theory of vast geological time.
I think Evolution can be split into six fundamental concepts that may or may not be liked by evolutionists but I believe the following is descriptive of the problem that the public swallows:
1. Cosmic evolution (Big Bang)
2. Chemical evolution (Origin of higher elements)
3. Stellar evolution (Formation of heavenly bodies)
4. Biological evolution (Life from non-life)
5. Macro-Evolution (Unique forms of life forming from other unique forms of life)
6. Micro-Evolution (Variations within certain types of organisms)
I know that this break down is often mocked by evolutionists but I have never heard anyone refute the accuracy of these basic descriptions on an intellectual level, just rhetoric.
Any rational person most accept 1 Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 5 as hypothetical speculation only. The ramifications of # 6 are interpretation driven. Do you agree?
I've seen this before (I've watched the H*vind videos too).
Generally I only use evolution in the biological sense, which incorporates everything that happens to life AFTER the first life appeared. IOW, it covers how life changes and the resultant history of life on Earth. That is the Theory of Evolution (with a capital 'E').
I've never seen the term "biological evolution" to refer to life from non-life; it's the field of abiogenesis.
Stellar evolution, chemical evolution and the origin of the universe generally gets lumped in the field of "cosmology".
So I would advise against using "evolution" as a catch-all to refer to everything from the origin of the universe up to and including population genetics in modern organisms. Stick to separate terms for each and it will be much clearer what you are talking about.
edited to add: I also think the term "Darwinian evolution" is very outdated. I know it's still tossed around a lot in current times, but it gives the false impression that evolutionary biology begins and ends with Darwin. Things have come a long way since Darwin's time.