Creationists, why is Relativity still 'just a theory'?

Question

You keep saying that evolution is 'just a thoery' as thought that means it isjust speculation.

So then why is relativity 'just a theory' it has been demonstrated in a number of ways including the precession of Mercury, light bending and graviational red shift. In fact, if relativity wasn't true, the GPS system wouldn't work.

So why is it 'just a theory'?

revuwhatever,

Here is one example of a repeatable test of evolution. There are others, but this is my personal favorite since there is no reason for a designer to have created the vestigal genes used in the study. So not only does their existence provide an argument against a hypothesis of design, it also provdies a means of testing the predictions of evolution.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#molecular_vestiges

We're not monkeys, you can actually get a decent glimpse of the relativity of time by conducting an experiment in your head much like Einstein did.

Imagine you are sitting in a train that is leaving town. You seat is facing backward and you are looking back at the clock in the town square. Just as the clock hits 1:00:00, the train instantly accelerates to the speed of light. You continue watching the clock. What do you think happens?

It's a simple example, but it provides a glimpse as to why time is relative. Even though the clock continues to move, you only see it at 1:00:00

Iraqisax, evolution is the only model that fits observation by biologists. So there isn't even a competing theory.

Your hunches about relativity don't really mean much since it has been demonstrated.

Your asseration that computer systems don't self generate is somewhat specious considering genetic algorithms and more recently genetic programming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_programming

Answer 1

It might be because they use the same part of their brain to process evolution as they do to process their religion. They see evolution as a challenge to genesis and therefore, an equivalent opposing force. This is where the trouble is because evolution is NOT an equivalent to religion. One can’t use the same brain function to process a scientific hypothesis and spirituality. It’s like using a sieve to transport water.

Answer 2

A theory is a conjecture that fits the evidence. If the Scientific Method has not been utilized, it is just conjecture, or speculation. When conjecture is used to explain an assumption, that is not science.

Evolution is the "cause" of life and the various species, to explain the assumption that they came into existence without a Creator. Since science cannot prove there was no Creator (anymore than Christians can prove that these was, and is), the whole idea of evolution as a method to explain an assumption is not science.

I don't know enough about relativity to know whether or not it is valid (I suspect that it isn't), but there is nowhere near the fanatical drive to get people to accept it, that we see with evolution.

Evolution is really contrary to common sense. We know, intuitively that complex systems cannot come into existence by chance. If people what to believe that they are descended from apes, I really don't care. What does annoy me, is when they insist that everyone else believe it, and call it science. If there is one thing evolution is NOT, that is science.

Answer 3

That's true. You might have also mentioned that the matter, space and time dilation predictions of General Relativity have been verified countless times as well as the relationships between energy, mass and the speed of light described in the world's most famous equation E = mc^2. In fact none of the predictions of General Relativity have ever been disproved. General Relativity is as solid as science gets.

Why is it still called a theory? Presumably for the same reason that electricity is described by electrical theory. We know a lot about electricity but nobody's ever seen an electron. General Relativity deals with the speed of light and it's relationship to mass and energy but it doesn't tell us why the speed of light is what it is.

Answer 4

Because they don't really know what the word "theory" means. They fail to realize that the word doesn't mean "guess".

Claiming that it is only a theory, they like to put warning labels on biology textbooks too about how evolution is only a theory not a fact. Pretty soon, they will put these BS warning labels on physics textbooks as well.

Something like:
"This textbook contains material on gravity. Gravity is a theory, not a fact, regarding a force that cannot be directly seen. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."

Answer 5

... wrong section..If you want to understand the scientific background on what a theory is and the process and time and evidence needed for it you should try one of the science sections.

The reason creationist like to say it's just a theory is to discredit it because they cannot or have not comprehended the credentials need for something to be called a theory in the scientific community. They think that since it's no absolute then it cannot be true but, their religion is absolute because their holy text says so means it is. But by doing this they've commit a fallacy by assuming such a holy text is true, if they text was not true the main premise of their logic would crumble and the would quite possible exploded into flames.

Answer 6

I'm sorry for hijacking your q, but i just have to make a comment on "we're not monkey's" answer. How can you say you don't agree with relativity, its possibly the most supported theory in history (barring evolution :p no jokes), and you clearly don't have the scintific knowledge to prove it wrong (else you'd have a nobel prize)? To say that you don't agree with relativity of time is just not something you can do with a scientific theory. I can say as many times as I like that I don't agree with gravity, but if I jump of the empire state building I'm not going to be walking away. No offence mate, but your talking bullsh*t.

Answer 7

OK, so by your own standard a theory must be testable, demonstrable and repeatable; is this true of evolution? No.
Evolution is less than a theory, its a fairy tale.

Its revulayshun; and what you just offered sounds more like evidence for the Biblical account of creation, and the fall of man. Your study shows that man is no longer what he once was, just like the Bible says. Losing an ability doesn't sound like progress to me, and isn't that the opposite of what evolution is supposed to be? I thoght we went from lesser to greater in the evolutionary model.

Answer 8

i think you're asking the wrong group of people. creationists didn't come of the theory of relativity. not even evolution. and now that you bring it up, i have no idea why it's still called a theory. I'm with you...?

Answer 9

They don't understand what "theory" means in science. They think it means the same as "hypothesis", because they are too much in the habit of not thinking for themselves or looking in any book other than the Bible.

Non-Believers
"Where No Religion is a Good Thing"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Non-Believers/

Answer 10

Have you traveled the speed of light? Can I go next time?