[knarf]

If it's explained, varifiably, duplicated untold millions of times without variation to the basic concept (aerodynamics) .. it's not a theory.

[Right Wing Assault]

If it's explained, varifiably, duplicated untold millions of times without variation to the basic concept (aerodynamics) .. it's not a theory.

Yes, it IS. The first part of your sentence is the definition of theory. Theory is a strong word. You mean it is not a hypothesis. People in aviation take a course called something like "Theory of Flight". Like this: http://www.aerodiamond.com/flight_theory.htm

Or this: http://www.aviation-history.com/theory/index-theory.html

See my post #22.

I ran across a website with this heading: "United Flight 93 Crash Theory Home Page - The Real Story of Flight 93". Incorrect use of the word 'theory' in the scientific sense. They should have used 'hypothesis'.

[Coyoteman]

If it's explained, varifiably, duplicated untold millions of times without variation to the basic concept (aerodynamics) .. it's not a theory.

You are confusing the fact of flight with the theory of flight; the former is observed, the latter explains how and why it occurs.

Same with evolution; there is the fact of evolution (change occurs from generation to generation) and the theory that explains how and why that change occurs.