What is a 'theroy'?

Question

We've debated the 'Theory' of evolution, and those who believe in it do not understand it.

When scientists do experiments under ideal lab conditions, they are trying to recreate what they GUESS was happening.

So, where is your proof that life evolved from non-life in the beginning?

Answer 1

You sure got those hypocritical evolutionists flapping their jaws in denial.

But you are exactly right.

Life can't evolve from non-life, and that has NEVER been proven.

A theory is simply a guess, and in the theory of evolution, their guess is voodoo science.

Muhahahaha....

Answer 2

A theory is an explanation based on evidence. To be a valid theory, there are some prerequisites.

1) The theory has to be defined. The terms in the theory have to have concrete defintions and explanation, itself, has to be non-ambiguous.

2) The theory has to be falsifiable. If there is nothing that, if found, would contradict the theory, then it is not a valid theory.

3) Assumptions used in the explanation have to be explicitly identified.

Now, this doesn't say whether the theory is correct or not, just that it is a valid theory.

Once a theory is made, it has to be compared to evidence. No amount of evidence will make a theory proven. Proofs are left to mathematicians, logisticians, and distilleries. As evidence is compared to the theory, the theory might be refined or the theory could be tossed completely if the basic assumptions are found to be wrong.

The theory also has to be objective. So, the theory undergoes peer review. Other scientists check whether the theory is valid and if the theory stands up to evidence. Scientists try to tear down each other's theories. That's the purpose of publishing a theory. They don't just claim something true and leave it at that. Scientists realize that no theory is complete and all need to be judged against evidence and revised if necessary.

The theory of evolution is an especially strong theory. It is a valid theory that can be tested against evidence. And it has been tested by a wide range of scientific disciplines. There have been many revisions to the theory as new evidence is found. This does not make the theory weak. It makes it stronger. The range of evidence supporting evolution is strong enough that few scientists question the basic premises anymore. There is much work to flesh out some of the details, and much of that is still controversial. Evolution has even been directly observed in our lifetimes. Speciation has been witnessed. And the genetic record that we are just now unraveling is offering much support for the theory while correcting some of the branches of the family tree.

In contrast, Intelligent Design is not a theory. The terms are ill-defined. It is not falsifiable. And its assumptions are invalid. It has been repeatedly rejected by peer review and the scant evidence it has put forth has been shown invalid. It is just bad science.

Answer 3

Theory is that which has a perfect answer on certain assumptions. Some theory cannot be proved by experiments and they have to be believed on the basis of certain assumed facts, which again is difficult to understand or realize. Experimental proof is not always permanent and it changes or modified due to certain results produced through another experiment. The truth is one and the same, and it is always the same, never changes and cannot be modified. The truth is a theory and cannot be always proved by experiments. Some experiments may prove truth, but some other untruth also. In theory it is difficult to understand, what is the beginning of this evolution, or from where the life evolved first.

Answer 4

I just asked this question. Here was the best answer:

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and univseral, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.

Some scientific laws, or laws of nature, include the law of gravity, the law of thermodynamics, and Hook’s law of elasticity.

Hypothesis: This is an educated guess based upon observation. It is a rational explanation of a single event or phenomenon based upon what is observed, but which has not been proved. Most hypotheses can be supported or refuted by experimentation or continued observation.

Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.

The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law governs a single action, whereas a theory explains a whole series of related phenomena.

Answer 5

The American Heritage Dictionary lists over 8 different definitions for theory. In this question alone, there have been a number of proposed definitions. Apparently it's really hard to nail down exactly what a theory is in exact language and have a consensus.

Likewise, the line between a theory and a hypothesis is somewhat smeared, as opposed to a bright line. Many thesauruses list the two words as synonyms for each other. Theories are generally considered to be stronger than hypothesis; it doesn't really give any sort of method for distinguishing between the two.

Rather than trying to define a theory, I think I will attempt to describe the essence of a theory.

First, I'd agree that a hypothesis is weaker than a theory, but I'd add that a theory is weaker than a law. If one could create a gradient of certainty, a law would be most certain, and a hypothesis least certain.

Second, a theory doesn't guarantee truth because it isn't certain. A theory is generally open for correction, so it isn't "proved" per se. But there is certainly evidence supporting it. The theory is generally an interpretation of that evidence and it will generally give predictions on how things will be or post-dictions on how things where. But again, it doesn't guarantee that the predictions and post-dictions are true.

Third, there is hardly ever a single theory, but multiple competing theories that attempt to explain a single set of data. Usually the one that accepted as truth is the simplest explanation, because it has to make the fewest assumptions. This means that it is more probable that it is true because it has fewer points of failure. There are a number of theories for the origin of the universe, such as the solid state universe, the big bang and the oscillating universe to name a few.

So with all this said, science isn't as exact as people would like it to be. It's definitely useful for discovering new knowledge though. As far as the proof for evolution, it's not that there is proof in the sense of hard cold evidence, but rather a reconstruction of what could have happened based on data gathered in the present. It's not guaranteed to be true, but it is possible that it is true.

Answer 6

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
Why do people not understand that a scientific theory is as close to fact as science allows? Its not a guess and evolution has been and continues to be thoroughly tested.
Evolution does not attempt to explain the origins of the first life. Many believe that life can evolve from basic chemicals under a variety of conditions. Organic chemicals that are the pre-curser to life are found everywhere in the universe. They have been recreated in lab experiments and just because we can't instantly create life does not mean given the billions of years that the earth has been around it did not happen.

Answer 7

The wording of this question is almost incoherent, such as to make any response worthless. It seems to be addressing the fact that many opponents of evolution (which this asker is) misuse the term "theory" as if its very use invalidated whatever the theory was "of". But it is not, because the asker has no curiosity about any point of view or set of ideas that do not match his own. This asker, who could not offer anything close to the standard of proof for the existence of his god that he demands evolutionists do to support a theory which already has mountains of evidence piled up in its favour - there really is no question any longer, dude - somehow equates a refusal to be convinced with an unconvincing argument. Don't waste your time with an intelligent answer. Let The Question Man answer this question and get best answer, because only he will give the asker the answer he wants to hear. Because they are the same person.

Answer 8

Few people understand theories.

I'm still assimilating Relativity.

Darwin's theories past the muster of the Catholic Church and Jewish Theologians, who found nothing in conflict with the Bible or Creationist concepts.

Darwin's theories are not Randomsit in nature.

Darwin states that life evolves and changes through a process of Natural Selection.

That means a choice was made. Something was specifically selected.

It implies there was some guidence or force behind that choice that was made.

Answer 9

A theory is a bunch of evidence compiled into a fact that proves a question.

Where is the proof that life evolved from non-life?
well , with theory of evolution thats not what it necessary means. life didnt evolve from non life things. life evolved from something that has life like the smallest particle and it swoly evolved to what we are today. From what i know is that we came from a SPONGE and plant of the coast of somewhere.

Answer 10

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it often does in other contexts. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from and/or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations that is predictive, logical and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory. Commonly, a large number of more specific hypotheses may be logically bound together by just one or two theories. As a general rule for use of the term, theories tend to deal with much broader sets of universals than do hypotheses, which ordinarily deal with much more specific sets of phenomena or specific applications of a theory.

Answer 11

The "theory" of evolution is based on hard factual evidence collected over several years. I believe in things I can see, unlike God which is also a "theory" and has no factual evidence to back it up. The bible was written by man, not God himself, which I think was just a history of the times not to be taken quite as literally as so many do these days.