First, Eevidence of fossils with increasing complexity at different levels is not proof that evolution is a fact. Second, your definition of what constitutes a "theory" is a specious attempt to suggest that evolution is a "fact." True, music theory explains how music works. but your analogy does not hold. I can hear music. Music can be played. It can be heard whenever a child bangs a piano. You cannot observe life being created out of nothing. You cannot replicate it in a laboratory. The theory of evolution does not explain how "evolution" works. The theory of evolution is an attempt to explain origins.
OMG, where to start...
"First, Eevidence of fossils with increasing complexity at different levels is not proof that evolution is a fact."
What about the fields other than paleontology that support evolution? Also, what qualifies your opinion on what is science that would make us believe you over the people with years of education and a lifetime devoted to the study of the subject? I would never have the nerve to say something is science or not based on nothing other than a hunch, when the entire scientific community has already made their decision on the subject.
"Second, your definition of what constitutes a "theory" is a specious attempt to suggest that evolution is a "fact." "
Open any basic science textbook, or go visit any science website (AiG is NOT a science website) and read what a 'law' and 'theory' are in science.
I know you won't go look it up for yourself, so here you go:
"A "law" is a readily observable fact about something. It is something that is obvious and undeniable. Allow me to clear up a common misconception right now, laws are not a "higher" stage than theory, and no theory ever becomes a law. Laws are simple and obvious statements about a phenomenon that never require a second guess, or an experiment, to verify them (for example, there is a law that states that there exists an apparent attraction between all objects having positive mass...it's called the law of Gravity, and it's not just undeniable, but it's readily observable and demonstrable (by virtue of the simple fact that you are not floating about, but are anchored to the Earth)).
Now, a "theory" is an advanced hypothesis. An hypothesis is a plausible, testable explanation of how a phenomenon works and/or why it works that way. Once an hypothesis has been tested repeatedly, under a variety of conditions, such that it is sufficient to convince a majority that the hypothesis is probably right ("right", in this context, means that it can be used successfully to make predictions as to how the phenomenon will behave if one conducts the same experiment(s) again), it can graduate to "theory", but it is still tested just as vigorously."
"You cannot observe life being created out of nothing. You cannot replicate it in a laboratory."
You can't put stars in a lab. Perhaps those shiny lights in the sky aren't really permanent nuclear explosions billions of light years away, maybe they're actually the souls of dead native warriors!
"You cannot observe life being created out of nothing."
"The theory of evolution does not explain how "evolution" works. The theory of evolution is an attempt to explain origins."
How many times does this have to be explained? Evolution does NOT try to explain the origins of life! Where do you get your information from?