Should we be still calling evolution a theory, dont we have enough proof through fossils that its fact?

Question

Do we call it a theory because we dont have proof, or is it because we dont want to offend the religous nuts. What aspects of Darwins theory do we doubt?

Answer 1

Religious zealots are always kicking at it.

Here's something for you:

It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old. It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from nonhumans. No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun.

The controversies about evolution lie in the realm of the relative importance of various forces in molding evolution.

Answer 2

Evolution, gravity, aerography, physics, etc, etc are all scientific and ALL theories that are accepted. Things in the natural world that we have questions about but no accepted proofs YET are called Hypotheses. Check Ockham's razor.
We in the real world are always open to changing views and opinions based on learning, and increasing knowledge.
Blind Faith is the opposite of that although a pretty good band from the 60's...they were PROGRESSIVE.
Also, modern monkeys would be rightly insulted with all these LUDITES insisting that evolutionists EVER suggested that we descended from them, and Darwin did not recant his theories on his deathbed; that is called the LADY HOPE story and was denied by Darwins family. Even most Creastionists know this, why it continuously pops up is a real statement on those that have no other way of arguing against Darwin-just through out disproved stories until some fool believes them. Reminds me of stuff that was put out by the Bush campaigns of 00 and 04. These are just another example of the type of advanced thinking that originates from the Creationist and ID mind.

Answer 3

Every fact in science is called a "theory." That's because the scientific method can never really prove anything.

Remember, gravity is also a theory. Nobody can ever prove that gravity exists. I could take 1,000 golf balls to the top of the Empire State Building and throw them off, one by one. But that would not prove that gravity exists. It would only prove that those 1,000 golf balls fell to the earth. I cannot prove that a hypothetical 1001st golf ball would also fall. However, I can make a VERY REASONABLE guess that it would.

Anything that science knows is considered tentative knowledge. That means that it's our best explanation, until a better one comes along. In the case of gravity, everything we've ever observed, ever, matches with the theory of gravity. So we treat that theory as a fact.

Evolution is very similar. Everything we've ever observed, ever, supports the theory of evolution. So we accept it as proven fact.

So the word "theory" doesn't mean that there's doubt. It's just a term that scientists use.

If the theory were not accepted as fact, we would call it a hypothesis. But it's not the hypothesis of evolution - it's the theory of evolution.

Answer 4

Statistically, correlation does not equal causation. Several years ago, a study found that a high percentage of serial killers had yellow bedrooms as children. That does not prove that yellow rooms cause serial killers, any more than a substantial fossil record that correlates with the theory of evolution proves evolution as fact. As critics often point out, there are still some problems with the fossil record, anyway. Even though I can accept evolution, I don't expect all the gaps in the fossil record to ever be filled.

Scientifically, for a theory to be proven requires that it can be replicated. Replicating millions of years of evolution is not exactly feasible! So, it is unlikely that evolution will ever _officially_ be more than a theory. I don't recall which ones now, but there are other things that we all accept as fact but are still technically theories.

At any rate, it's not at all about fears of religious zealots; the standards of the scientific community itself are what require that evolution remain a theory.

Answer 5

a theory can only be called fact if it can be proven in practice right? basically, all life came from the same source so every living creature is going to contain some protein that connects it to any other creature. this works with God too, so it works for me. Apparently we share 33% of our DNA with bananas. And if you read Dawin's book he mentions that God breathed life at the beginning anyway but science nuts seem to skip this sentence. I am a Christian and have no problem excepting evoultion to an extent, although i think that people existed at the same time as monkeys.
by the way, has anyone noticed that humans as a whole are getting taller? evolution in practice maybe??

Answer 6

It's funny, I always assumed it was accepted fact since it's the only theory we are taught at school. It wasn't till I came on this site that I realised a lot of people think it very far from being proved. Creationism is still a big belief system. I don't know, is the answer, but I have an open mind and will watch the answers you get with interest.

Answer 7

I don't think the majority of scientists are the slightest bit concerned about offending religious nuts - they've been doing it for centuries & they're not going to temper their ideas to sate them now.

I suspect that it's called a theory because most real scientists recognise the fact that most things are never actually PROVEN. There is only ever an overwhelming amount of evidence to support a theory or not. Scientists like to be precise and as such a theory with strong supporting evidence or weak or no supporting evidence, is still referred to as a theory.

Answer 8

Theory in science means a comprehensive explanation of the observed facts; it does not carry the connotation often given it in common usage of mere speculation. We have a theory of light and a theory of gravity, too, but nobody is suggesting we're not quite sure if gravity and light really happen.

Theories are not facts, they are the explanation of the facts as we know them. A theory is never a finished thing, as more details are added to it as our knowledge increases. So it's not correct to say that a theory has been proven, only that certain aspects of it are confirmed by certain observations.

Religious people sometimes attempt to muddy the waters by applying the standards of religious dogma to science, but science is by its very nature non-dogmatic. While individual scientists may cling to their pet beliefs, science as a whole embraces the evolution of its theories.

Here's a couple of relevant definitions of theory:
1 : the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
5 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena

Answer 9

Theories are based on facts. With little or no facts they are called hypotheses. With overwhelming facts they are called laws. With no facts they are called superstitutions. New facts are being uncovered all the time, and they point to the validity of Evolution as a plausible theory for the development of life on this planet. Any attempt to discredit this theory with co-called Creationsim or Intelligent Design are masquarades of the religeous to usurp Sceince and preach their dogma.

Answer 10

It's only a theory and one which Darwin denounced before he died. The first writings on the subject are in Genesis chapter one. Check it out.That's all you need to know cause nobody could understand how it was done anyway. The earth is only about 8000 years old despite what carbon dating says.It is a man made process and can't really be relied upon. God created man as an adult so there is no reason why he couldn't create the earth as a fully formed planet. It is actually less far fetched than an explosion just making life happen....