Wrong. Generally, evolution means "change."
Nope. You do not face people who claim that things do not change. You face a challenge to the idea that all life is descended from a universal common ancestor by means of random mutations and natural selection.
Darwinists will do anything to insulate themselves from science — ie, working to falsify ideas.
In biology, it means "change in allele frequencies in a population over time."
Which is just "change" with lots of superfluous babble around it to give the impression of a well-reasoned theory. For example, there is no difference between the ideas conveyed by the word "change" and the phrase "change over time." The "over time" is entirely redundant. Allele frequencies can't change in anything but a population, so that gets rid of "in a population." And Darwinists will commonly point to changes that have nothing to do with genetics and claim evolution. I once saw a Darwinist suggest that a bird changing its song was "speciation." It's safe to read "change in allele frequencies in a population over time" as simply "change."
But Darwinists are not challenged to defend the idea that things change. They just want the discussion to be that because they cannot survive in a discussion without their obfuscations and other fallacies...
Which is the way God creates new taxa.
Other fallacies such as question begging.
I notice many creationist groups are willing to accept this for new species, genera, and families. Sometimes, they'll go a bit farther than that.
And the fallacy of asserting what someone else believes as if it is relevant to the discussion.
As most Christians acknowledge, there is no conflict between scripture and evolution.
And the Darwinist favorite — the appeal to popularity.
When will they learn to engage rationally?