Why is evolution considered a theory...?

Question

so, how would one go about proving it?

Practically speaking, could it ever be elevated to the Law of Evolution?

Answer 1

Because it IS a theory... a SCIENTIFIC theory. In layman’s terms, if something is said to be “just a theory,” it usually means that it is a mere guess, or is unproved. It might even lack credibility. But in scientific terms, a theory implies that something has been proven and is generally accepted as being true.

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.

No, it couldn't be a law. Again, a law governs a single action. A theory explains complex issues. Evolution is incredibly complex. Here, think of it this way:

A scientific law is like a slingshot. A slingshot has but one moving part--the rubber band. If you put a rock in it and draw it back, the rock will fly out at a predictable speed, depending upon the distance the band is drawn back.

An automobile has many moving parts, all working in unison to perform the chore of transporting someone from one point to another point. An automobile is a complex piece of machinery. Sometimes, improvements are made to one or more component parts. A new set of spark plugs that are composed of a better alloy that can withstand heat better, for example, might replace the existing set. But the function of the automobile as a whole remains unchanged.

A theory is like the automobile. Components of it can be changed or improved upon, without changing the overall truth of the theory as a whole.

Answer 2

Because in complex biological creatures like man or animals it takes 100 or more million years to manifest itself.

Quite convienent, don't you think. No one flapping their gums here will be around when they finally prove or disprove anything.

Rapid manifestations tend to be called "mutations" not "evolutions." Such as bird flu jumping to man.

We do see some light evolutionary aspects, such as the body developing little gremlins that eat penicillian. That has developed over the last 50 years as a method of combating anti-biotics, but still isn't totally considered an evolutionary step.

An evolutionary step might be the irridication of the tonsils or appendix in all humans. First gradual, then becoming dominant.

It could also be the vanishing of blue and gree eyes due to racial intermarriages, since brown genetically predomiantes. At first blue and green would become recessive, then the gene would be irradicated completley, leaving only brown eyes in humans.

The gene vanishing completely would be considered an evolutionary step. Just become recessive would be normal genetics.

To become a law you would have to see some pattern of things happened that then become a predictable event. Footprints, such as the gene for the appendix altering or blending into other intestinal genes in some people.

Once you observe such a phenomon for a while and can make predictions on others things based upon what you saw on past things and they come true, then you establish laws on evolutionary actions.

Answer 3

In general, "theories" do not promote to "laws". Theories are broad conceptual frameworks. Laws tend to refer to small repeatable observations. The laws of thermodynamics are based on measurements. The law of universal graviation was an assumption by Newton to formulate the theory of gravity in Newtonian mechanics. It took years of observations to confirm it. In geometry, it would have been called an axiom.

So far the predicted mechanisms behind gravity, gravitons and gravity waves, have not been demonstrated. Mechanisms for evolution, mutations, gene duplication, transposons, and many others. As biology lacks universal rules that apply to particle physics, it's doubtful every last mechanism will be discovered (plus how many past mechanism were eliminated by extiction), so it will never be truly complete. That does not mean that it will ever be disproven.

Answer 4

It's considered a theory because it is. This is not unlike most things in the scientific world. People have this misconception that science bestows the title of "fact" on something to denote that it is set in conrete and undeniable. This isn't true at all. A reputable scientific institution does not do this because all things in science are held to be tentative. We reserve the right to make chanes to a theory or model when we learn something new about it.

Answer 5

"In science, a theory is a proposed description, explanation, or model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theory which explains why the apple behaves so is the current theory of gravitation."

=====

Your best answer is Zero Cool's. An easy 10-point winner if ever I saw one.

Answer 6

Ever heard of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity - or nuclear theory, or electrical theory, or the theory of gravity? They are scientific theories, as is the scientific theory of biological evolution.
It is called science, that is the terminology, and that is how it works. A ‘scientific theory’ is not just an idea or made-up explanation for things real or imagined.

If a person says they have a ‘theory’ that George Bush is Bigfoot’s love slave or that the earth is only 6000 years old, it is no more than something they made up. Whether true or not, they have not been observed or empirically established and verified.

Answer 7

There are 2 parts to evolution:

1. The fact that evolution has occurred, is occurring and will continue to occurr.

2. The theory regarding the mechanisms behind the fact.

Some of the creationists need to realize that we also study graviational theory. That doesn't mean that "theory" = any halfassed notion with no evidence.

Answer 8

it is a theory in the same sense that gravity, light, and black holes are all just theories. That is what they are called. It is only the religious that fail to understand the word "theory" as it applies to the scientific method. In this sense, "theory" is about as close to "fact" as you can get. But people that do not want to believe it simply latch onto that word "theory" with the thinking "I know it is all backed up by hard facts but I am going to go on continuing to call it 'just a theory' ".

Anyone who says "Evolution is just a theory" has obviously taken ZERO time to learn about the scientific method or evolution.

Answer 9

For the same reason that the Theory of Relativity is a theory.

Answer 10

Because in scientific terms, a theory is the best thing we have - the theory of gravity, germ theory, atomic theory, and so on. Theories include facts and laws, but aren't 'upgraded' to facts - they include facts. Evolution has millions of pieces of evidence and is supported by the fact of natural selection, the fact of genetic similarity, the fact of retroviruses, it goes on and on.