Funny you should mention changing the definition of a theory, because that's exactly what the Intelligent Design lobbyists tried to do in the Dover trial - changing the high school curriculum so that the term "theory" was so broad, that it could be interpreted to include everything from astrology, pyramid power, tarot, etc, which may well be right, but if they aren't testable, they aren't science.
You have to remember with scientific theories, no matter how well supported they are by the evidence, they will never be changed to facts because to do so would be to blur the lines between the evidence and the explanations for the evidence. Atomic theory will always be atomic theory, The theory of gravity will always be the theory of gravity.
The facts which gravity draws on are that things always head down if allowed, that things of the same mass go down at the same speed, that things go down at different speeds on different planets and the observations of the differences between those planets which may account for the differences in the speed at which things travel down. The theory part of gravity is tying all those things together and saying "this is what is happening, this is what we're calling it, and we welcome your continued testing of the data. If at some point you have a more credible TESTABLE theory then that theory will replace the theory of gravity and we'll call the way things fall down something else.
So that's it in a nutshell folks, if it's not testable, then it's not good enough for science, so when people watch things like O'Reilly and then come on here saying "It's a scientific fact that it takes more faith to be an atheist", that is a misuse of the word science.
Apologies for not really being an answer to the question, more of an answer to one of the answers.
Ciao,
2007-05-13 10:41:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Scientific Theory
2007-05-13 09:17:08
·
answer #2
·
answered by punch 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well supported scientific theories provide the best scientific explanations for natural realities, which are the only realities science can examine that is, the best explanation of the natural aspects of the reality. That however says nothing about the question of God's action in creating the circumstances and the natural laws that govern such natural realities. Also, there are some realities that are purely supernatural, with no natural aspects, which therefore lie totally outside the purview of science. The only way to gain knowledge of such realities is through direct revelation by God.
2007-05-13 09:48:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by PaulCyp 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Supernatural explanations, which, by their nature are irrational, and have no evidence to support them, are not acceptable AS explanations.
A scientific theory, which has been thought through, compared to reality, tested, and argued about, is consistent with what is known is much more acceptable to the rational mind.
After all, that's what rationality IS.
2007-05-13 14:38:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by tehabwa 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Supernatural Explanation .....it goes beyond scientific theory and hard for the average mind to comprehend.....and one has to see beyond to understand....until you've experienced it don't knock it.
2007-05-13 09:10:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by 2 cents 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Cindy is right. Theory is not fact, unless the definition has changed.
2007-05-13 09:15:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by johnnywalker 4
·
0⤊
0⤋