If Evolution "evidence" does exist why is it still a "theory"?

Question

In all of these Creation and Evolution questions I keep coming across, people keep talking about the "Evidence" that Evolution has. If such evidence truly exists, then why is Evolution still considered a theory rather than a fact?

Answer 1

They define "theory" like a mathematical term. Like theorum. So it is proven and not just an idea. And BTW "Hate Boy", gravity is not a theory, it is a LAW, like the law of thermodynamics. There is a difference. Go ask your teachers.

The fact about evolutionists can be summed up in this quote by George Wald...

When it comes to the origins of life there are only two possibilities: Creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved hundreds of years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds; therefore, we choose to believe the impossible. That life arose from spontaneous chance. - George Wald, "The Origin of Life", Scientific American May 1954

Though proven wrong by sheer math, they still refuse to give it up, just because they cannot stomach the alternative.

Answer 2

You fail to understand scientific nomenclature. A theory, such as evolution or gravity or the theory of the firm in economics, is a set of propositions held with such a high degree of certainty that no one in the discipline disputes their validity as the best and most correct understanding of the world. When Einstein corrected Newton's theory of gravitation he did not prove Newton's model was wrong (as it is still used today be professional physicists) rather he showed it was incomplete and expanded it in profound ways.

Likewise, evolution has billions upon billions of facts to support it while intelligent design websites fail to point to the body of academic literature they have created because it doesn't exist.

A law, such as Boyles Law, the laws of thermodynamics or the law of demand (again in economics so as to not leave out the social sciences) are professional rules of thumb that are generally true but not strictly true. For example, there is never a case where Boyle's Law actually holds, but it is the best approximation of what actually occurs having no further information than pressure, volume, number of moles and temperature. It is close to true and chemists use it all the time unless real precision is required. Likewise, the law of demand is mostly true (people tend to buy less as things increase in price) but also is falsified by the case of Giffen Goods where the higher the price of the good, the more people buy.

An hypothesis is a belief, still in testing, about how the world works. It is usually very narrowly described such as the efficient market hypothesis, and is written in an easily falsfiable way.

A fact is the lowest level of truth. The reason is that there is often measurement error in any single specific fact. So for example, it was taught as a fact that humans had 22 genes until improved measurement showed us there were 23. The theory was still correct but the specific fact was false.

Answer 3

In science, as theory is basically a model of understanding of certian things - in this case, evolution. It describes what has been observed and how it is agreed, based on this evidence, how it happened.

It cannot be called a law because it cannot be proven 100%. Much like gravity, while it can be proven to exist it cannot be proven 100% why it exists. There is a law that describes what happens because of gravity but the cause of gravity is covered in the theory.

I hope this clears things up for you.

Answer 4

a theory, in science, is something that all available evidence points to as being a fact. This is different than how the word is used on the street. What layman call a theory is called a hypothesis in science. Evolution is too established to be called a hypothesis. That is why it's called a theory.

Also , you must understand, the "theory" part is in the how, not the if. We know animals change. We have various theories on exactly what process causes it to happen as shown.

Answer 5

The same reason we have the theory of gravity. The word theory has a slightly different meaning in science than in layman's terms. The standards of science are so rigorous that it is extremely difficult for something to become a scientific law. Trust me, creationism doesn't stand a chance.

Answer 6

A theory is a coherent framework of concepts that can be used to make an orderly explanation of the facts. A well made theory should be able to predict the results of controlled experiments. A theory is not a fact in itself.
Fossils and genetic mutations are facts. How you make sense of them is the theory.

Answer 7

because science is an ever changing field. even things that have been proven are sometimes called a theory because people are always finding new information. there is evidence suppoerting this theory just like there is eveidence supporting other theories that contradict the evolution theory; this one just happens to have more evidence and be more popular

Answer 8

A scientific theory is different that what you would call a theory.

A scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are not expressing reservations about its truth.

Answer 9

because other claims has evidences too...also, not because something is a theory it's not necessarily true, the "theory of gravity" is up to this days remains a theory but every physicist and normal individuals uphold it as a fact, don't you?...and when something is a fact, it's not necessarily be the truth. galileo believes that the earth revolves around the sun while the catholics in his era despises him for advocating that and called him heretic. john paul apologises later.

Answer 10

Evolution is a fact, as well as a theory.

The evidence shows that Evolution has occurred--the "theory" part is HOW it occurs.

As has been pointed out, "theory" in scientific terms has a specific meaning--and that meaning is not the opposite of "fact"

Answer 11

Creationism doesn't have a theory. It only has a nice little story. Creationism is not science. It cannot be accepted as fact. At most, it can only be believed with one's faith in the Bible.

An evolutionist doesn't turn to his faith in the Bible for his reasoning. An evolutionist turns to "nature" and studies it thoroughly.

Creationism has a long way to go until it is scientifically proven, unlike evolution.