English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Did you know that there is as much mutually supportive evidence for the big bang theory and the theory of evolution as there is for the theory that the earth revolves around the sun?

In science, theories never become facts no matter how much evidence there may be because theories and facts have different meanings.

In science, a "fact" is an observation whereas a "theory" is an explanation of the observations.

2007-08-20 06:30:37 · 8 answers · asked by Patty 2 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

8 answers

yes you are correct sir, theory is science in not the same as it is in laymans terms.

2007-08-20 06:35:15 · answer #1 · answered by Pauls Imaginary Friend 2 · 2 0

Actually a Theory is a statement that has been made, that tries to explain something that proof is non existent, but the signs point to the theory being fact.
Theories have been proven in the past, most hypothesis are nothing more than theories until proven.
Fact is not an observation in which a theory is used to explain it, fact is just that, scientific proof that something is or isn't.
Theories are the question while fact is the response.

2007-08-20 06:38:54 · answer #2 · answered by Perhaps I love you more 4 · 0 1

Even by your own stunted definition you could say that a theory is based on a number of facts.

If I pose a theory based on 10 facts then it's tentative at best. If my theory is not disproved after 1,000 facts it's still not a law, but it's looking stronger. If my theory still holds true after 1,000,000 facts, none of which offer any contrary evidence, then I could say my theory is looking pretty strong.

That being said, it's possible that a fact does surface that is counter to my theory. In that case I must alter my theory to comply with all facts. Otherwise my theory will be invalid.

Even if I didn't I would still have a much stronger theory than that which is being offered by the theists. Why is it that creationists don't care about proving anything, but rather just disproving one particular piece of science that they disagree with?

2007-08-20 06:35:09 · answer #3 · answered by Peter D 7 · 0 1

A "theory" in science is based on a group of provable observations, not just some wild guess. The anti-evolutionists try to disprove the theory of evolution by suggesting that it's the wild-guess kind of theory. In fact, it's based on factual observations of paleontology; we can't call it a fact only because we weren't there to actually see the creatures evolve.

2007-08-20 06:38:02 · answer #4 · answered by BrooklynInMyBones 3 · 2 0

it's a fact earth rotate around sun.

but its true many theories never become a fact because scientist CANNOT live that long to witness.

for it to be a fact , one must WITNESS the whole event , at the very least one MUST be able to conduct experiment that succeed because of the theory.

and btw it work both way. we can use fact to back up a theory. and we can also have a theory to back up the fact.

we cannot go back time to witness evolution , neither can we witness big bang.

thus we can never ever prove it to be a fact. yet we admit there's chance it may be wrong and thus label it as a theory

2007-08-20 06:38:16 · answer #5 · answered by Curious 3 · 0 1

bible=fact vs. evolution= theory, pow 1 to 0 we win

2007-08-20 06:56:31 · answer #6 · answered by gubwv 3 · 0 1

Facts can be reproduced. Theories can't.


2007-08-20 06:36:16 · answer #7 · answered by Jeanmarie 7 · 0 2

What evidence?
Micro - yes, macro - no!

2007-08-20 06:36:14 · answer #8 · answered by Nickel-for-your-thoughts 5 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers