Why do people always try to prove opinion is fact?

Question

Why don't they just state it like it is?
It is just an opinion, theory!!!

There is the theory of evolution.
There is the theory of creationism.

While both have strong & weak points (seemingly), the fact is:
Neither have been proven conclusively to be fact.

I believe it should be illegal to teach these opinions as fact till we know for sure.

While each do provide neat sounding "solutions" to the problems, I hate to remind people that back in the day, it was also "proven" as fact that the earth was held up on the back of an elephant that stood on a turtle.

And Ra the sun God drove his chariot across the sky each day to bring light. It was a known, indisputable fact.

I feel the real truth is, that no-one was there, no-one saw it.
Just like you would expect to have someone that actually saw a wreck when witnessing in court of law, the same should apply here also.

Since we have no-one that has seen it & can prove it yet, they should be taught as the theories they are.

Not facts?

P.S. I am not in any way saying that evolution nor creationism cannot be "proven" in a sense, as some say the Bible proves creationism, while others say that our environment proves evolution.

My case in point, is that while each are entirely possible, it is also possible that there could be yet another, undiscovered way that we got here, that no-one thought of yet.

Which is why, I believe they should be taught, but only as theories albeit, possible good theories, till we advance enough in science to definitely know for certain.

Answer 1

I know what you mean. It could be annoying but I do not let it bother me too much. : )

Answer 2

Creationism is not a theory. It's a mythological story. Evolution is more than a theory. It's been proven countless times. Just because you don't accept the proof doesn't mean it isn't there. I have a better question for you. Why do people insist on putting Creation and Evolution in the same boat when in reality they are far from each other? One is a myth and the other is a scientifically sound theory. There are millions of scientific theories out there, but the only ones people have a problem with are the ones that contradict their ancient beliefs. Sorry, but just like the whole Sun revolving around Earth controversy, evolution will eventually be accepted as fact. That won't change just because you don't like it.

Answer 3

There's also a Theory of Gravity and Atomic Theory.

Theory, in science, does not mean "guess". A theory is a set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

By the scientific definition, Creationism is not a theory because it has no evidence to support it. On the other hand, Evolution has evidence to support it and has been tested many times. Therefore, evolution is a theory (scientifically speaking).

Answer 4

There is a great deal of evidence supporting evolution and none at all supporting creationism, so this is not a fifty-fifty one or the other choice, the evidence is on the side of evolution. Common descent is proven by the recent decoding of the human genome so that pushes evolution into fact rather than theory today.

Answer 5

Everyone likes to think that his opinion is factual. In the case of scientific theories, most cannot be proven. But evolution is an exception: it is provable, and I have done so. (Details on request.) Actually, the proof is irrelevant; evolution has been established science for a hundred years, and is known to be correct because it gives correct predictions -- just as does any other established scientific theory.

Answer 6

By that logic nothing should be taught at all. Ever.

As a practical concern, we do need to learn things to make our way in the world, and we would need to take the most logical explanation with the most evidence. Evolution has the much stronger claim, but that does not mean that creationism should be forgotten.

I am for the idea of putting forward both viewpoints, noting that there are still others (mostly fringe ideas), and let the reader decide.

Answer 7

I agree with you.

But be careful how you use the word "theory" as applied to science. In everyday usage, theory means theoretical; in science, it means one stage beyond a hypothesis.

Therefore, if you mean theoretical in science, use the word hypothesis. So the correct SCIENTIFIC term is "Hypothesis of Evolution".

Edit : After reading previous responses, it is obvious that many cannot differentiate between micro-evolution and macro-evolution. Macro-evolution (the gradual changing of one species into another) has NEVER been proven. That makes it a scientific hypothesis, not a theory.

Answer 8

By definition creationism can't be a theory. A theory is a well accepted scientific conclusion. Theories are based on facts. There is no theory of creationism. Creationism is a belief.

Answer 9

Creationism is not a scientific theory. No even close. You need evidence to become a theory. Like the theory of gravity.

It's also clear that you have no understanding of what a scientific theory actually is.

Answer 10

I think it is a bit limiting to suggest that we should only teach what we know for sure. Absolutely nothing can be proved for certain, even things we take as fact like gravity etc. have been tested to the absolute limit we can test it, but nothing can be proven.

Answer 11

Sorry, humble, but the claim that evolution isn't a "fact" is going to require you to delineate what it is that you take evolution to be. *All* the microbiologists *I* know watch DNA change over time in the lab. So, is it a current version of evolution that is not a fact, or is it an older and discarded version that isn't a fact?

HTH

Charles