Does it bother you when reading a science book or watching a video and they treat Evolution as a fact?

Question

Evolution is supposedly a 'scientific theory' yet most of the textbooks treat it as an absolute fact along with news articles and various scientific programs. They say that this animal evolved over x and x many years ago, etc. or that this animal lived in this X age and was an ancestor to a certain modern animal. None of this can be proven because the scientific method would have to be able to do repeatable experiments that lasted millions and millions of years plus the fact that no one was around back then to observe them and no supposed human ancestor wrote down anything about it. I find it odd that evolutionists say that mans ancestors have been around for over a million years and they just invented writing several thousands of years ago? Give me a break. Scientists are trying to brainwash people to believe this stuff because they refuse to believe in anything supernatural. They are naturalists and materialists and that is why they can't explain the human mind/body problem.

Answer 1

There was once a song that said "People by nature will do what they can to never accept what they don't understand" If the movie or the book introduce science fiction it has to be real so people can believe it and sound interesting to them that is the way they can make money out of the movie or the book but people also have brains and mature enough to know how to separate between real and fiction.

Answer 2

Unfortunately for your argument, in scientific jargon calling something a "theory" is as close as any real scientists will ever get to calling something "fact." Unlike true believers, scientists recognize that there is always the possibility that another explanation will come along that better fits the available facts, therefore, a real scientist would never call evolution a "fact." However, for a hypothesis to be declared a theory, it must have undergone extensive testing by multiple scientists and the results must have upheld the hypothesis. Evolution has passed over 150 years of testing by thousands of scientists across dozens of fields of inquiry.

Not only that, but our understanding of the principles and mechanisms of evolution has evolved. When tests have shown our ideas about the principles and mechanisms of evolution to be inaccurate or incomplete, scientists have changed the theory to reflect our increased understanding. In contrast, creationists expect us to believe exactly the same thing that people believed 4000 years ago, when 95% or more of the population was illiterate and even the most highly educated members of society believed now-patent falsehoods such as the idea that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around it. Some Polynesian cultures believe that the earth swims along through space on the back of a giant turtle. Exactly what scientifically valid evidence can creationists show us that their story is any less absurd?

That said, I don't see why so many people think evolution and God are mutually exclusive. God is immortal, all-powerful, all-wise - why on earth is it so unreasonable to think that He could not have thought us something like evolution and guided it Himself over billions of years? If you read Gensis as a metaphor created by a loving teacher for His ignorant children, you can have it both ways. The numbers and order even work out pretty well. Frankly I think it's pretty insulting to God to think that He couldn't dream up a metaphor better than Shakespeare, or to understand that pre-literate societies would have difficulty understanding numbers as vast as a billion or concepts as complex as natural selection.

Answer 3

I hate to burst your bubble mate but a theory in science is something that has a lot of attributable evidence towards it. Not only that, evolution IS a fact, the theory merely backs it up, it isn't all just the theory of evolution. It's the same with gravity. There's a theory for that too.

Additionally, you really need to think about how you're grouping every rational professional person under the title of "scientist". It would be anthropologists and historians that say that written records have only existed for the past 10,000 years, not the geologists that would date the Earth at 4 billion years old or the geneticists who confirm that humans and primates share a common ancenstor.

I think that when you read that science book you should actually pay attention, not just scoff at how it contradicts your superstitious beliefs. You might learn something.

Answer 4

I personally feel that people are too narrow-minded in their thinking. It has to be EITHER science OR religion with the explanations of the way things work. Why can't it be both, just using different languages?

Answer 5

If, we humans un-earthed something as simple as a bowl, we know that some thinking individual made it. But something as complex as our own bodies just happened to work out this way. I agree with Daysee.

Answer 6

i stopped listening to all that bull years ago cuzz i know i am made in the image of my Father God not some caveman or monkey

Answer 7

Actually it really bothers me when they try to say that evolution is not a fact, when any dummy can see that it is! They ARE teaching it in schools!!

Answer 8

evolution is a sad fact

Answer 9

I think it is rather sad. Evolution is mans way to try and erase God.

Answer 10

no, i just dont listen