Only a theory?

Question

People on here keep saying evolution is 'only' a theory. This makes me think they probably don't realize that theories are the most powerful tools that science has.

Facts and laws are useful - but they fall under theories as a whole. The theory of gravity (note: theory) contains Newton's laws, relativity, orbital mechanics, and you falling of your roof. Electromagnetic theory contains Kirchoff's laws, Maxwell's laws, and the fact that your car/computer/lights work. Evolutionary theory contains the facts that we CAN observe evolution happening (see bacteria and the flu virus), the fossil record, the human genome, we can see natural selection at work, etc.

Theories are the most important tool of science - theories are never elevated to facts because they are already more important then facts and laws. Evolution is one of the best supported theories in science - we have more evidence for it than we do for eletromagetics (but your computer still works!).

Answer 1

Evolution might be ONLY a theory, but Creationism (as the fundamentalists try to portray it) is far less than a theory. It is a guess at best. I am a Christian and I believe in evolution. I believe the Bible has revealed the Big bang and the story of the creation of man was a metaphor for the formation of the first cells that would later lead to man as we see him, told in the only way that the people at the time could understand.

Answer 2

Theories are powerful tools that may eventually lead to rules and laws, but even those are not absolute.

Newton's laws of gravity and motion don't apply in a RELATAVISTIC universe, especailly at great speeds like near light speed.

Newton's laws only work in a limited framework.

Any laws of Evolution might fall prey to the same fraemwork.

All this proves is that NOTHING is absolute.

Evolution may be as unattainable as a reality system as is unified field theory.

And freaks of nature occur and we call this mutations, which are NOT evolutionary.

Bird flu jumping to humans is NOT evolution, it is mutation.

To embrace evolution we have to embrace a set of things a lot of people won't want to accept.

For example, are Einsteins and Hawkings a separate speice from dullards. You know, the people who hate learning, can't learn and are, well, to coin a phrase, dumb blondes.

Are dumb blondes ONE speices and GEEKS or GENIUSES another?

Will one prevaile?

Will one go extinct!

Is a Savant an evolutionary aspect or a mutation.

The definition of a Savant is someone who can look at a page of numbers for a second or two and give you an answer faster than a computer can.

Motzart was a musical Savant. He could hear a peice, memorize it instanatly, play it back and even make it better.

Is this an evolutionary aspect or just a mutation?

Will people accept these realities!

It is said the evoluationary speices existed side by side. At one point CroMagnon existed with maybe even Home Erectus, but Cro Magnon became extinct.

If evolution is real, then humans are in breeds, just like Dogs and CAts.

Blacks, whites, chinese, browns, reds.

Different breeds.

This means we are NOT brothers and sisters, but at best cousins or second cousins.

Answer 3

Ernesto - unfortunately you really don't know what you are talking about - "laws and theories are subject to falsification which tells of the uncertainty of the nature of science". Being subject to falsification means that if contrary evidence existed, they would be proved false. ALL good science is based on being subject to falsification. Other wise it is not science! "subject to falsification" does not mean they are a bit false!! (but the opposite if they haven't been proved false). And scientific Theories do NOT become scientific Laws. A law notes that something simple happens (generally approximated by a simple mathematical formula), a theory explains WHY and HOW something (or a lot of things) happens. Hence Evolution by Natural Selection is a scientific theory, which explains how all the "macro-evolution" we observe, for example, happens.

Anyway, thanks eri. Keep up the good work.

Answer 4

Eri, I completely agree with you. The problem is, most people outside of science either don't understand the theories set by scientists who usually spend their entire lives to come up with them, or they don't understand the meaning of the word "theory" in the scientific sense. They think that a theory is a guess, they don't understand that scientists don't make up theories unless there's substantial evidence backing up their work. Take Electromagnetism for example. It is the most complete theory in Physics, and perhaps all science. It has been tested over and over in experiments and it has held true, yet it is still called a theory.
In the case of Evolution, most people despise it because according to them it is against the "word of god". But what is the "word of god"? There are many different religions who believe in some sort of a god. And really the only religion that seems to have a major problem with science, Christianity, and whose followers keep saying "Evolution is against the word of god" should have no right to say that. Because if you think about it, how many times has the bible been written "according" to somebody?

Answer 5

Just a note to say that both scientific laws and theories are subject to falsification which tells of the uncertainty of the nature of science. Sciences such as physics and chemistry tend to have more laws because they can often be described in mathematical forms whereas biology has more theory than math to it. Micro evolution is directly observable and repeatable unlike macro evolution which is Darwinism. In simple terms you can make up more reasons to believe in Darwinism and call then science theory rather than law.

Answer 6

The theory of evolution sure seems to tidy things up and put things in order. But lets go back to the first "living" cell. Did this cell contain all information for all forms of life on earth, information which is not even material, such as the different thought processes of various kinds of animals and man, or is all this evolution, non-intelligence revealing intelligence in time? I think that the dog eat dog thing is parallel to evolution, where only the strong survive, but somehow love surfaced and survived in a climate that should have annihilated love in its infancy. Maybe this is why many will say that it is just a theory.

Answer 7

Very well said. However, I think they are stuck on the idea of Creationism. Look at the bible. It's a book of theories about what happened years ago...no one knows for sure if they happened or not, because they didn't exist back then. Yet, they believe it whole-heartedly without a doubt.

Maybe someday they will see the real light.

Answer 8

Don't worry, the theory isn't going anywhere as long as I am alive and kicking. Evolution makes alot more sence than 'god made man and then women from his rib'. And where do the monkeys come in?

Answer 9

what you say is true to a point all those theories have been proven evolution has not and if it is true we evolved from monkeys why are there still monkeys?
Science only proves that there are explainable methods for some things which obviously to me must have been created by an intelligent being. as to the BIG BANG have you ever had a chocolate cake magically appear by dumping everything from a baking pantry into a bowl? you must follow a precise formular called a recipe therefore everything down to the smallest atom must be predictable there fore created with thought and planning not just appeared by mistake

Answer 10

Evolution is the best theory we have at the moment, though I do not believe that it is undeniably true. After all, weren't we once sure that the world was flat?