Why do people compare the theory of evolution to the law of gravity?

Question

When they are trying to prove evolution is supposed to be solid.

Answer 1

Evolution is as solid as gravity. We know because it's a natural law that living organisms will adapt to their environments.

Whether you take that to be a theological proof is a question of your own innate spirituality, and not of science.

Answer 2

The reason is that some people (both evolutionists and creationists) do not understand the scientific definition of a theory, which is completely different from the same word in its common usage. In scientific terms, a hypothesis requires a lot of evidence and experimentation to become a theory.

By the way, it's the THEORY of gravity.
Evolutionists use the theory of gravity to prove a point: creationists will accept theories, not just laws. Why should one idea be acceptable as a theory, but another one only as a law?

If you want an explanation look at my profile and the questions I've asked. One of them compares evolution and the atomic theory.

Answer 3

It's one elementary attempt in proving.
The law of gravity is universal to bodies. The theory of evolution is making an analogy to point out a universal law that governs species

Answer 4

Not many people compare Darwin's theory, to Newtons Law. It makes little sense in science, and is only relivant to moralistic arguments about racial and social conflict. I personally don't have any problems with accepting Darwins theories. But I certainly will not accept a biological limit to man's development. We have far more to achieve than survival.

Mostly, you have fundamentalists that are not educated enough in the sciences. They feel threatened, and lash out at atheists, and materialists. As a response, some of the atheists try to elevate a theory beyond any practical use, and into the realm of spiritualism. Bad move...

Answer 5

Hey Cap, there are plenty of issues with gravity. It still has a bit of a problem fitting in with the rest of the current physical theories (e.g., quantum expectations). Should we discard it and start floating around? Or maybe we can just say that it's "God's will" that we're stuck to the surface of the earth? After all, if it's not "solid", then it must be false, right?

Answer 6

The laws of Gravity have been proven. The THEORY of evolution hasn't been proven. That is why it is still a theory instead of being called a law. Actually there are hundreds of different theories that are all being touted by different scientists who think their theory will be the one to bring evolution out of the realm of theory transform it into a law like gravity. People who really believe in evolution sometimes try to give it credence by comparing it to something that is already established as a well-known law like evolution. It would be better if those people would just accept that evolution hasn't been proven to be true. They can believe whatever they like but until it is proven, it isn't science. Evolution as it stands now is a religion, it is something that has to be accepted by faith since it cannot and hasn't been proven. So, our public schools to teach a religion even though those who believe in evolution deny that it is a religion. Religions don't have to revolve around a diety, they just have to be something that people believe by faith and that has a following. My religion can't be proven either and I believe it by faith; however, I at least acknowledge that it can't be proven and choose to believe anyway.

Answer 7

Evolution is a fact in the same sense that gravity is a fact - It can be observed. The theory of gravity attempts to explain how gravity occurs, and the theory of evolution attempts to explain how evolution occurs - i.e. descent with modification by means of natural selection.

Answer 8

Theories which would be captured in an user-friendly mathematical formulation are stated as rules (the formulation is the regulation shooting that assets of the universe). merely as "theory" has a special scientific definition, so does "regulation". rules don' even could desire to be appropriate, merely smart. case in point Newtons regulation of Gravitation has been basic, in view that Einstein to be an approximation, even with the shown fact that that's precise adequate in a brilliant many circumstances for use without the relativity corrections. And it remains stated as a regulation, even however all of us understand that's no longer precisely suitable. there is no longer something so stupid as utilising what you don't comprehend to take care of that which you're pretending is real. -- Regards, John Popelish --

Answer 9

Because evolution is just a theory with no solid proof behind it , So its just like you said a theory

Answer 10

People get very confused between the evolution of a species(within one species) which is proven, and evolution from one species to another.

Darwin himself said that if his theory of evolution between species(the origin of humankind). That multitudes of links would be found between the species. We do not have these multitudes of links. In fact we cannot show the evolution from any one species to another.