Quantcast

Is Evolution Fact or Theory?

Adam 2012/05/07 22:19:02
You!
Add Photos & Videos
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.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Dan ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/05/07 23:57:16 (edited)
    Theory
    Dan ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    +13
    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.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • TheTrut... JCD aka... 2012/05/09 06:42:19
    TheTruth1313
    +1
    Thank you for the info.
  • Adam TheTrut... 2012/05/08 13:32:23
    Adam
    One of the most proven theories of all time, The Law of Gravity. Is still just a theory. Because it is an explanation of why things fall, not the fact that things fall. Since evolution is just an explanation of how life today may exist it inherently can't be a fact but only a theory. If it is well proven it then becomes a Law.
  • TheTrut... Adam 2012/05/09 06:43:00
    TheTruth1313
    A very eloquent point.
  • Rave 2012/05/08 06:37:40
    Theory
    Rave
    +4
    Evolution is a scientific theory, just like the theory of gravity. Theories are supported by many facts, and this is how they become theories. If a theory didn't hold any facts, it would not be a theory, it would be a hypothesis yet to be proved or disproved (In many cases can't be proved or disproved) which is where creationism falls in.
  • BritPunk Rave 2012/05/08 09:33:27
    BritPunk
    Nicely put, old bean.
  • 13_JunkyardDog 2012/05/08 06:34:23
    Fact
    13_JunkyardDog
    +2
    It might as well be fact. Comparing Evolution to Creationism is like comparing the "idea" that its your parents putting gifts under the tree vs. the "idea" that its santa putting gifts under the tree
  • Raithere 2012/05/08 06:02:23
    Fact
    Raithere
    +4
    Evolution is both a fact and a theory (well theories actually).

    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.
  • redhorse29 2012/05/08 05:47:48
    Fact
    redhorse29
    +2
    Evolution is a fact. In many experiments this has been proven. There are questions that remain as to how fast change can really occur and survive. There is always the question of how and why selective traits occur. Science wants us to believe another two word for evolution is random change.
  • AL redhorse29 2012/05/08 06:21:18 (edited)
    AL
    +1
    LOL! Now that sure is funny alright!Since you just said yourself- IT took the "intelligence" of Scientest to preform these scientific experiment to desprove "intelligent creation" or design! When you just admitted youreslf-you even need the intelligence of a scientest to prove there isn't any INTELLIGENT Design or Creation?
  • D D 2012/05/08 05:10:34
    Theory
    D D
    +1
    Theory. People forget that. They believe it as fact just like people believe in creation.
  • AL 2012/05/08 04:55:03
    Theory
    AL
    +2
    It's aTheory as is creation as well! Yet the only differance is, intelligent design still makes alot more sense! Since you can have all the building blocks in play, yet its impossible to have them come together without intelligent design anyway!
  • Raithere AL 2012/05/08 20:17:49
    Raithere
    There are 2 primary differences between Evolution and ID.

    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.
  • AL Raithere 2012/05/09 00:29:46
    AL
    There is no real evidence-until they can figure out how it all just came about-Without any intelligent design! Again, Name anything at all that can be made or created WITHOUT any Intelligent design! Just give me one example please?
  • Raithere AL 2012/05/09 02:49:16
    Raithere
    "There is no real evidence-until they can figure out how it all just came about"

    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.
  • AL Raithere 2012/05/09 04:26:11 (edited)
    AL
    LOL! You can't even prove there was life itself without intelligent design! Design without any designer?Oh really? Thats like building a house without a builder partner!
  • Arianne 2012/05/08 04:47:35
    Theory
    Arianne
    +1
    Its the THEORY of evolution. Which means it has a LOT of evidence to support its claims, but not enough for it to be completely proven.

    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.
  • reaper 2012/05/08 04:41:56 (edited)
  • Raithere reaper 2012/05/08 20:20:42
    Raithere
    Actually, it doesn't even qualify as a hypothesis. A hypothesis must be falsifiable.
  • zbacku 2012/05/08 04:27:17
    Theory
    zbacku
    +3
    http://scienceblogs.com/world...
    It seems that the 'facts' of Evolution are changing constantly.
  • misha 2012/05/08 04:12:40
    Fact
    misha
    +2
    im not a liberal, but i live in the mountains,and ive watched it for myself. evolution goes like this: a change in a species life occurs that shifts the way they go about things, like their diet. they change in size over time and hey adapt to different things. so if an animal goes extinct, the animal that eats it as their diet will find something else they can eat so they can survive, and sometimes this takes drastic measures like physical change in order to survive.
  • zbacku misha 2012/05/08 04:24:03
    zbacku
    +2
    Have you seen life evolve from a rock yet?????
  • reaper zbacku 2012/05/08 04:36:13
    reaper
    +4
    not how it works.
  • America... zbacku 2012/05/08 04:42:18
    American☆Atheist
    +2
    that is not evolution, it is abiogenenis
  • Kirino America... 2012/05/08 04:45:01
  • misha America... 2012/05/08 05:02:29
    misha
    last time i checked natural selection was apart of evolution.
  • America... misha 2012/05/08 15:06:15
    American☆Atheist
    Natural selection is not where we came from a rock.
  • misha America... 2012/05/08 20:35:42
    misha
    Sorry I didn't see who it was twords at first, It took me a minute.
  • AL zbacku 2012/05/08 04:58:23
    AL
    +1
    Now just try it without any intelligent design as well! In other words, their whole agument is based on it just happened!
  • America... AL 2012/05/08 15:06:35
    American☆Atheist
    did your god, just happen,?
  • AL America... 2012/05/09 00:30:43
    AL
    +1
    He who created time itself, is not subject to his own creation!
  • Batou zbacku 2012/05/08 15:43:51
    Batou
    Good thing theory of evolution only applies to living things, not rocks.

    I do recall the Bible mentioning that first man was formed from dust, so I take it you've seen that happen???
  • Jay Theyme misha 2012/05/08 07:15:34
    Jay Theyme
    +2
    yes, you are correct. What you are witnessing is a kind of 'devolution'. It is definitely specialization. but it is filtering 'down' and 'out' of an already existing gene pool.

    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.
  • CREW grand 2012/05/08 04:06:56
    Fact
    CREW grand
    +2
    But I won't waste my time explaining, because conservatives' minds are so muddled that they are unable to distinguish fact from fiction or truth from fantasy.
    They have no reasoning ability because almost everything they believe is wrong.

    Don
  • misha CREW grand 2012/05/08 04:20:24
    misha
    +3
    actually conservatives are some of the most sane, good, logical people. Liberals actually perfectly fit your discription if thats the word you were looking for.
  • America... misha 2012/05/08 04:42:49
    American☆Atheist
    Liberals accept science.
  • zbacku America... 2012/05/08 04:49:15
    zbacku
    +2
    Science that seems to change all the time.
  • AL zbacku 2012/05/08 05:09:38 (edited)
    AL
    +1
    And how can anyone even conduct any Scientific expariment-Whout the intelligence of the Scientist himslf? My whole argument is also based on intelligent design as a basic fact for just that reasont!
  • Rave zbacku 2012/05/08 06:34:05
    Rave
    If Science didn't change, it wouldn't be very reliable now would it? New evidence comes in, and you see Science evolve, that's just the natural cycle of life.
  • America... zbacku 2012/05/08 15:07:00
    American☆Atheist
    because we have more evidence.
  • zbacku America... 2012/05/08 04:50:31
    zbacku
    +2
    Now we are told that it may have been the Dinosaurs FARTS that caused the 'Global Warming' of their time. No wonder the government wants to tax cow farts.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/08/28 05:40:06

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals