Most people dont understand that nothing in science is ever set in stone. Science is just our attempt to model the universe with our theories.
What would our world be like if we accepted every single theory as fact, and never questioned it?
We might still believe in a flat earth or geocentric solar system.
We might still believe that things float or sink because of a certain amount of "Earth", "Water", Air" and "Fire" in it.
We might still believe that an Atom is the smallest unit of matter, and indestructible.
We might still believe in the theory of spontaneous generation - that animals and bacteria spontaneously generate from food.
I could go on, but even though I believe evolution is the most likely theory, I acknowledge that we truly know nothing, and that as we learn more our theories - our models - will change.
Is Evolution Fact or Theory?
Adam
2012/05/07 22:19:02
|
|
|||||
|
86 votes
|
|
63% | |||
|
50 votes
|
|
37% | |||
If you are ever arguing about Evolution with a liberal you may be bombarded with a statement that Evolution is a fact. But hey wow wow wow wait a minute you say. There is no way Evolution can be a fact because there is no way you can show that it happened without a doubt. And facts are only those things that happened. This is where things get interesting. They will bombard you with something like this: Evolution is a fact because all the evidence points to it. It has been proven scientifically so therefore it is a fact. You then think to yourself what happened here. That is not what a fact is that is a theory or a Law. Well this is what happened. They changed the definition of fact so that they can make the argument that they want.
If you look in a dictionary today you might find that one of the definitions written for fact is:
The quality of being actual: Actuality - a question of fact hinges on evidence
another way of saying The quality of being actual is: Something that most likely happened. If you look in the 1996 dictionary or around that time period you will find that this definition of fact is not there.
So you can see liberals have changed the definitions of the words themselves so they can win the argument. At which point they make call you ignorant. Yet another word they changed by adding the word uneducated. Why is this important. Well if you don't know that Evolution is a fact then you must not be educated and therefore you can be called ignorant. Well who wants to be called ignorant. By doing this they hope they have shut you up enough, or that you have finally accepted that Evolution is a fact.
Well at this point you might be saying. This isn't fair; how could this happen. To them it isn't about fair it is about whatever they can do to win their agenda. Besides whoever defines the debate wins the debate right. In order to win the debate they have decided to backdoor a way to control the debate. So now that the whole conspiracy has been broken wide open do you agree with them that it is a fact or are you with me on it is a theory and hold to what we all were taught what a fact is when we were younger.
If you look in a dictionary today you might find that one of the definitions written for fact is:
The quality of being actual: Actuality - a question of fact hinges on evidence
another way of saying The quality of being actual is: Something that most likely happened. If you look in the 1996 dictionary or around that time period you will find that this definition of fact is not there.
So you can see liberals have changed the definitions of the words themselves so they can win the argument. At which point they make call you ignorant. Yet another word they changed by adding the word uneducated. Why is this important. Well if you don't know that Evolution is a fact then you must not be educated and therefore you can be called ignorant. Well who wants to be called ignorant. By doing this they hope they have shut you up enough, or that you have finally accepted that Evolution is a fact.
Well at this point you might be saying. This isn't fair; how could this happen. To them it isn't about fair it is about whatever they can do to win their agenda. Besides whoever defines the debate wins the debate right. In order to win the debate they have decided to backdoor a way to control the debate. So now that the whole conspiracy has been broken wide open do you agree with them that it is a fact or are you with me on it is a theory and hold to what we all were taught what a fact is when we were younger.
There is the processes of Evolution (the change of allele frequency in a population over time). This is simply an observed fact. There is also the fact of observed speciation (when a single population divides into two or more populations that can no longer interbreed).
Of course, the scientific use of the term theory is quite different than how it tends to be used colloquially. In science a theory is an explanation, or model, that explains the available facts and is not contradicted by any.
So Evolution also contains theories, such as all present day life originated from a common ancestor. This explains facts such as the genetic, morphological, and bio-chemical similarities between species. Or the theory of punctuated equilibrium (the theory that species remain largely static and that when evolutionary changes occur they are relatively rapid (geologically speaking).
Many scientific theories, such as Evolution, are so well established that to call them factual is not a misstatement. Such as the Theory of Gravity, the Germ Theory of Disease, the Atomic Theory, the Cell Theory, Quantum Electrodynamic Theory, and the Theory of General Relativity, to name a few.
1. Evolutionary theory fits all available evidence and remains uncontracticted by any evidence.
2. ID does not. In most presentations it's not even falsifiable which means it doesn't even qualify as a valid scientific hypothesis. Much less a theory.
This is an absurd proposition. If this were true we could know nothing about anything.
"Name anything at all that can be made or created WITHOUT any Intelligent design!"
Something "made or created" presupposes a designer. But we have many examples of things that appear similar to something that is designed yet lacks a designer.
A snowflake, for example, has structure and form very like something a human would create. Yet there is no creator's hand needed, the processes of chemistry and physics cause these to become. Again and again in nature we find that those things that were once thought to have been caused by an intelligent agent are merely the result of these same simple rules.
Who knows? Some day someone might come up with a better theory with more evidence. Until then I'll believe in evolution for a lack of any better theories.
It seems that the 'facts' of Evolution are changing constantly.
I do recall the Bible mentioning that first man was formed from dust, so I take it you've seen that happen???
Imagine if you will I have a large bag of marbles of some brand. Maybe I decide to start removing all the black ones. then all the purple ones. Then I end up with a bag of the lightest colored marbles.
I've 'devolved' the already existing marble pool into a specialized light-color version of my original bag. This (from a sheer logic pov) can't be how the original bag came to be. It didn't come to be by 'removing' marbles.
It's remarkable how many people correctly hear about natural selection and mistakenly think this is evidence FOR the Evolutionist ToE. In fact, it flies in the face of it. Its nearly the very opposite process.
They have no reasoning ability because almost everything they believe is wrong.
Don