Replies

>>” It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt." - What Mark Twain Didn't Say

Good advice and why I usually lurk :-)

>> Even AIG (Link Snip) discourages this.
>>The definition of a theory in science is not the same as in an everyday context.

Huh? We are talking about the theory of evolution being taught as a SCIENTIFIC fact, in school. You may feel free to use evolution in an everyday way without interference from me. (Grin, go on, evolve /Humor)

The history of science can be summed up with “We were wrong”, Did Einstein invalidate the Law of gravity? No, he affirmed, and refined it. Gravity is a law because it is repeatable, and it works every time (thank good ness)

>> But go forward 300 years, and you see Einstein correcting even Newton

Precisely my point, if your really interested in “Science”, you will be open to competing theories, especially since it’s a theory and even laws in science can use refinement, theories that can’t stand up to any debate about their merits have no business being taught as if they were as immutable as the law of gravity (which was updated too).

And since you brought Albert into this, he was a theist (believed in God) “God doesn’t play dice with the universe” – Albert Einstein

You misunderstand - evolution is both a theory and a fact. How so? The theory explains the diversity of life and its relation to each other; then there's the fact - there is so much evidence for evolution and considering observed speciation, it's laughable to deny it. It's equivalent to sticking your fingers in your ears, shutting your eyes, and shouting, "I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" In the same manner, there is the fact, law, and theory of gravitation. The theory explains the tendency for objects with mass to accelerate to each other, the law (Gx(m1m2/r^2)) describes the tendency, and the fact is the universal observation of the tendency. Newton was wrong; it's as simple as that. The only problem was, his Laws were approximately correct at speeds less than 0.1c. Evolution is constantly refined. What's your point? As for competing theories however, there isn't any evidence that really supports anything else. Lamarckian evolution's gone, spontaneous generation's gone, along with everything else. They couldn't withstand the scientific scrutiny, but evolution did. Albert wasn't a theist, in the sense of a personal God - he was a scientific pantheist. Ever heard of physicists and their "God" talk?