Is it time to clear up what a "scientific theory" is, again..?

Question

Many people learned in elementary school that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do not use the terms that way, however. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 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.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the fact of evolution. The NAS defines a fact as "an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as 'true.'"

The fossil record and abundant other evidence testify that organisms have evolved through time. Although no one observed those transformations, the indirect evidence is clear, unambiguous and compelling.

So no more "..but it's only a theory.." remarks please..!!

Answer 1

The law of evolution is an unarguable fact, scientists develop 'scientific theories' to explain the laws of nature.
A law is unquestionable and unalterable, the theory designed to explain the law can be altered and this is where the simple minded biblebashers get confused

Answer 2

Interesting that none of what you said actually defies the true definition of the word theory. In the end it is still a theory, an imagined idea of what could be, based on the knowledge that they have.
Here is the thing- If science had all the answers, completely understood everything there was to understand about the universe (even just as it is today) and came up with a theory that they wanted to treat as law, that would be one thing- but even with all that we know and understand, we have not even scratched the surface- there are new discoveries daily and old ideas and "understandings" are constantly being proven false or changed by newer information- even the theory of evolution itself has changed overtime. There are so many simple things in common daily life that scientists have not been able to figure out.
Regardless of what your preferred definition is, a theory based on assumption and limited knowledge is nothing more than a theory. It's just basic common sense.

Answer 3

The big cry over evolution is really just a play on words. Some religious people have never learned that the language of science differs from that of law, medicine, or even math.

Though all use the English alphabet the word theory means "idea" in English, and "possible explanation" in science.

The word "fried," can mean yummy chicken or darn...i fried my motherboard... Not the same thing.


In short, stop saying "evolution is not a theory" and instead say it is not a "scientific law." That would be the proper lingo.

Now go to Church and play your Bingo.

Answer 4

Not so fast mask man, sometimes THEORY in its traditional sense IS implied. For instance in the evolution of man. The evolution of man is STILL a theory in the traditional sense, meaning probable but needs more information. They have found human skulls going further back than when man was supposed to be an ape!

Answer 5

Theorhetically speaking....even gravity is only a theory, because as you so pointed out "no amount of validation changes a theory into a law".....it just happens to be that Gravity is one that we see so often its "law status" is taken for granted.....

Gravity has been working for me a long time. I mean I see the result, but not the actual "thing". It kinda relies on a kinda faith, no?

So uh, this "theory" of evolution? I can accept that.

;) Be well all - Peace

Answer 6

No. It's not quite that simple to turn a Theory into a Fact. Fact is proven truth. Theory is mostly guess work. Where is your missing link you silly goose? Don't try to tell me or my Christian brothers your silly Theory has been proven. It is still a Theory mostly guess work nothing has been proven. The jury is still out. You can't win with a simplyfied definition of Theory it doesen't change the facts.
Kisses BB

Answer 7

Yeah I got a remark, What !

Maybe I'll just go along with Miles P, thumbs up on Miles P



And while were at it is Pluto a planet or not.They told us in school it was.And what about all of those poor fortune tellers out there who have told people that their lives are ruled by the planet Pluto?Whats going to happen to their life's if its not a planet now?This is just to much I am going to bed.

PS. I think I will forget the Theories and stick with the facts. The Word of God.Good night all,and God Bless!

Answer 8

i think interior the Bible checklist. whilst Jesus advance into right here He did no longer replace the Genesis checklist. So that is not a huge deal to me if it advance into to no longer Jesus. however exceeded off, i think God guided this technique. Sciences's area is to locate nature. God's area is interior the non secular worldwide, a realm no longer conceivable to locate with the methods and language of technology. It could be examined with the guts, the techniques and the soul - and the techniques could locate away to incorporate the two geographical regions. technology is the only good thank you to appreciate the organic worldwide, and its methods whilst spectacular utilized can generate profound insights into cloth life. yet technology is powerless to respond to questions which incorporate " Why did the universe come into being?" "what's the which ability of human life?" " What happens as quickly as we die? " of course evolution theory has been the 'resource of great soreness '; ) in non secular community over previous one hundred fifty years, and that resistance shows no signs and warning signs of lessening. yet believers could be nicely recommended to look heavily on the overpowering weight of scientific documents helping this view of relatedness of all residing issues, which incorporate ourselves. Given the strenght of the information, that's difficult that so little progression in public acceptance has occured interior the rustic. per risk area of the prblem relates certainly to an common fake impact of the observe "theory'. i stumbled on 2 option definitions for the observe "theory" a) a speculative or conjectural view of a few thing b) common innovations underlying a technology, artwork, etc.:song theory, theory of equations. that's that this 2d utilization that scientists intend whilst they communicate approximately evolutionary theory, as they point out gravitational theory or the germ theory of infectious ailment. in this context, the observe 'theory" isn't meant to conveyun fact; for that purpose a scientist could use the observe " hypothesis".

Answer 9

"but there is a missing link therefore evolution is wrong!"

right.... both religion and scientific theories cannot be proven from what we know today. until i meet god or go in a time machine to witness evolution, both are theories are they not?

Answer 10

Its a "theory" because it calls itself a "theory", but in the definition of scientific theory, it is as closley related to fact/truth as it can possibly be, for scientific purpose.

I didnt have to read the post, I knew that already. And I still dont believe in the whole "theory" thing.