Your first sentence is true. The second is not. This may help:
The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for winnowing the truth from lies and delusion. The simple version looks something like this:source: What is the ``scientific method''?* 1. Observe some aspect of the universe.When consistency is obtained the hypothesis becomes a theory and provides a coherent set of propositions which explain a class of phenomena. A theory is then a framework within which observations are explained and predictions are made.
* 2. Invent a tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.
* 3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.
* 4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results.
* 5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation.
The second sentence is correct based on the observation of the complexity of life itself, suggesting a design, and the fact there are no observations of spontaneous creation of any forms, complex or simple.
And it is because of that very same scientifc method that evolution is not a law. The observations required to confirm its predictions are missing.
>* 1. Observe some aspect of the universe.
The complexity and variety of life on this planet.
>* 2. Invent a tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.
Life had a creator and designer.
>* 3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.
It was a one time event. Life does not arise spontaneously from inert materials. One species does not transform into another or multiple other species.
* 4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results.
This is where it becomes inductive - demonstrate that the hypothesis is not true. Produce life from inert materials or show that one species definitely turned into another - i.e. produce the transitional forms. Obviously we can't recreate the Big Bang or any of the physical laws that existed just before the Big Bang - but some people accept it as a theory. Actually, its a theory based on a theory, but certainly nothing more than that.
>* 5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation.
This is required for a law, not a theory. This is why Relativity remains a theory, and evolution is not a law.