why do people assume theories are the opposite of facts?

Question

on the contrary theories are based around facts making them even more truthful to a question. why are people taking this theory of evolution as 100% false when all the evidence points there?

Answer 1

Ignornance. Plain and simple.

Answer 2

Despite their "faith", believers are more comfortable defending "facts" (which usually are generally held opinions). Many say "I know" when they mean "I believe". The word "theory" sounds tenuous and uncertain and I'm sure they couldn't distinguish it from a hypothesis or even a premise. A theory sounds like something put together by a committee, without any "authority" to make decisions. Authority is a big issue for them. They respect words like "law" (although they will want to verify the legislator) because it sounds settled. The worst kind of theory is a "revised" theory, which just shouts that it was made up all along. (They even get upset when a "revised" translation of scripture gets published.) Anything worth knowing is supposed to be revealed, complete and unambiguous, from the beginning. A theory would be at best guesswork, at worst a lie.

If one were to speak of the "Theory of the Atonement", the "Theory of the Exodus" or the "Resurrection Theory", there would be riots in the street. These things are not arguable because they haven't been questioned since they were first promulgated. A theory questions the obvious, it violates what "everyone knows". (Otherwise, it wouldn't be necessary.) It implies that what we think we observe is an illusion and that would mean God was misleading us. (No wonder Galileo got whacked.)

It's not just "theory" that's being misunderstood, it's "facts" too.

Answer 3

People assume that if it isn't a "law" but only a "theory" it isn't worthy of acceptance. You are correct that a theory is supported by facts. Contrare to some comments I have seen on here, a theory is not the equivalent of a hypothesis. A hypothesis is a guess regarding the result of a scientific experiment/study. It comes at the beginning. A theory on the other hand, is developed as a result of such studies/experiments. It is then reproduced and expanded upon. It amazes me how some people will just automatically accept the "theory of relativity" or other scientific theories (even though they are just theories as well) as true, but will continue to state that the "theory of evolution" doesn't matter because it is only a theory.

Answer 4

I think the whole hang up is based around the word "day". A Day means a measurement of time usually 24 hrs. One revolution around the sun. If its used as a measurement of time before the creation of the heavens and earth could it mean 7 million years?Give or take a few mil,
Then both theories would be true. Right?

Answer 5

Not only ignorance but wilful ignorance. Anyone who has been on this forum more than ten minutes has had the difference between theory as used in normal English and the scientific term explained at least five times.

Answer 6

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 stand in opposition.

Answer 7

Colloquial use of the word has given it a new meaning that is contrary to its scientific use.

Colloquially, a 'theory' is a conjecture. "I have a theory..."
Scientifically, it's a well-substantiated explanation of observed fact.

Answer 8

Willful ignorance. Willful because when they read this, they will not look up the word, but rather continue to misinterpret it.