Posted on 01/27/2007 4:40:50 PM PST by balch3
Evolution is a fact in that we have observed change over time and common descent. Evolutionary theory explains why and how evolution occurs.
I didn't realize evolution had gone from being a theory to being "proven"?
Long misuse of these terms has lead to great confusion. Newton's "theory" of gravity is correct. Evolutionary "theory" is incorrect. Evolution is a hypothesis, but not a scientific one. The criteria of science are, repeatability, predictability, non-contradiction, and falsifiability. Evolution cannot meet any of these criteria.
Since you must have missed the link I gave upthread to a list of definitions, I will post the actual definitions here.
These definitions are from a google search, with additions from this thread:
Theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses." Addendum: "Theories do not grow up to be laws. Theories explain laws." (Courtesy of VadeRetro.)
Theory: A scientifically testable general principle or body of principles offered to explain observed phenomena. In scientific usage, a theory is distinct from a hypothesis (or conjecture) that is proposed to explain previously observed phenomena. For a hypothesis to rise to the level of theory, it must predict the existence of new phenomena that are subsequently observed. A theory can be overturned if new phenomena are observed that directly contradict the theory. [Source]
When a scientific theory has a long history of being supported by verifiable evidence, it is appropriate to speak about "acceptance" of (not "belief" in) the theory; or we can say that we have "confidence" (not "faith") in the theory. It is the dependence on verifiable data and the capability of testing that distinguish scientific theories from matters of faith.
Hypothesis: a tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices."
Proof: Except for math and geometry, there is little that is actually proved. Even well-established scientific theories can't be conclusively proved, because--at least in principle--a counter-example might be discovered. Scientific theories are always accepted provisionally, and are regarded as reliable only because they are supported (not proved) by the verifiable facts they purport to explain and by the predictions which they successfully make. All scientific theories are subject to revision (or even rejection) if new data are discovered which necessitates this.
Law: a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature; "the laws of thermodynamics."
Model: a simplified representation designed to illuminate complex processes; a hypothetical description of a complex entity or process; a physical or mathematical representation of a process that can be used to predict some aspect of the process; a representation such that knowledge concerning the model offers insight about the entity modelled.
Speculation: a hypothesis that has been formed by speculating or conjecturing (usually with little hard evidence). When a scientist speculates he is drawing on experience, patterns and somewhat unrelated things that are known or appear to be likely. This becomes a very informed guess.
Conjecture: speculation: a hypothesis that has been formed by speculating or conjecturing (usually with little hard evidence); guess: a message expressing an opinion based on incomplete evidence; reasoning that involves the formation of conclusions from incomplete evidence.
Guess: an opinion or estimate based on incomplete evidence, or on little or no information.
Assumption: premise: a statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn; "on the assumption that he has been injured we can infer that he will not to play"
Impression: a vague or subjective idea in which some confidence is placed; "his impression of her was favorable"; "what are your feelings about the crisis?"; "it strengthened my belief in his sincerity"; "I had a feeling that she was lying."
Opinion: a personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty.
Observation: any information collected with the senses.
Data: Individual measurements; facts, figures, pieces of information, statistics, either historical or derived by calculation, experimentation, surveys, etc.; evidence from which conclusions can be inferred.
Fact: when an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact.
Truth: This is a word best avoided entirely in physics [and science] except when placed in quotes, or with careful qualification. Its colloquial use has so many shades of meaning from ‘it seems to be correct’ to the absolute truths claimed by religion, that it’s use causes nothing but misunderstanding. Someone once said "Science seeks proximate (approximate) truths." Others speak of provisional or tentative truths. Certainly science claims no final or absolute truths. Source.
Science: a method of learning about the world by applying the principles of the scientific method, which includes making empirical observations, proposing hypotheses to explain those observations, and testing those hypotheses in valid and reliable ways; also refers to the organized body of knowledge that results from scientific study.
Religion: Theistic: 1. the belief in a superhuman controlling power, esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship. 2. the expression of this in worship. 3. a particular system of faith and worship.
Religion: Non-Theistic: The word religion has many definitions, all of which can embrace sacred lore and wisdom and knowledge of God or gods, souls and spirits. Religion deals with the spirit in relation to itself, the universe and other life. Essentially, religion is belief in spiritual beings. As it relates to the world, religion is a system of beliefs and practices by means of which a group of people struggles with the ultimate problems of human life.
Belief: any cognitive content (perception) held as true; religious faith.
Faith: the belief in something for which there is no material evidence or empirical proof; acceptance of ideals, beliefs, etc., which are not necessarily demonstrable through experimentation or observation. A strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny.
Dogma: a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without evidence.
Some good definitions, as used in physics, can be found: Here.
Based on these, evolution is a theory. CS and ID are beliefs.
[Last revised 9/26/06]
(It contradicts the long established theory so important to medicine that there cannot be spontaneous generation of life, for example.)
Sorry, that abiogenesis, not evolution.
Forgive me, but I just called up a friend of mine who is a militant gun grabbing pornographic scientist, and he says you're wrong, and that he doesn't give a hoot about the Constitution one way or the other.
Evolution as a fact -- that allele frequencies change over time -- has been proven. Evolutionary theory explains why that is and how it occurs.
Boone proves what a prejudiced and ignorant blowhard he is. I welcome his comments on evolution, or any scientific subject, just as much as I welcome Barbara Streisand's comments on politics. Christians with a mindless anti-evolution agenda make all believers look bad in the eyes of the materialisic evolutionists.
About the only right on thing Boone says is that many scientists use evolution as a prop to support their atheism. This is a food fight between hardcore atheists and Biblical literalists, using evolution and the Bible as weapons. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Because evolutionary theory says exactly NOTHING about God, His existence, or the origins of life. Nor does any respectable scientist believe humans evolved from apes.
Of course, I realize is is hopeless to expect Boone and his ilk to actually acquaint themselves with what evolutionary theory actually claims, or to expect them to give even one inch in their literalist interpretation of the Holy Scriptures.
Now I can sit back and wait for the fundies on this thread to inform me I am not a 'real' believer, since I refuse to sacrifice my intellect on the altar of irrational Biblical literalism.
Oops! Here we go:
Please list some scientific criteria that the ToE fails to satisfy.
Perhaps, but I think it (evolution) fails the test of science on at least two marks: 1) it is not subject to the scientific method since it cannot be tested empirically (you cannot design an experiment to test evolution using control and experimental groups), 2) it cannot be proven false. Scientists generally like (require?) their theories to be falsifiable, otherwise they cannot be tested.
Bear with me - I'm quite wet behind the ears when it comes to these threads.
You mentioned allele frequencies. Doesn't that refer to genetic drifts and adaptation, not so much THE theory of evolution? That is what I am trying to understand.
"Ok if we evolved from apes why are they still here ??????"
shhh don't confuse people with facts.
Evolution will make a monkey out of you and me.
I guess you didn't pay attention in class..
Thanks for the posting. I think that will clear some things up.
"Sorry, that's abiogenesis, not evolution."
Unless you're talking about some kind of evolution that accepts my contention that nothing yet proves life had to have a "beginning," and current evidence indicates all life comes from life, the beginning would have to be abiogenesis.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
abiogenesis: The supposed development of living organisms from nonliving matter.
or from "Onelook" [http://public.onelook.com/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/bware/dofindp.cgi]
abiogenesis: a hypothetical organic phenomenon by which living organisms are created from nonliving matter.
Hank
"I didn't realize evolution had gone from being a theory to being "proven"?"
Species have been appearing and disappearing for millions of years. You can see it for yourself in the fossil record.
And he doesn't know a darn thing about science. Pat, shut up and sing.
shhh don't confuse people with facts."
This is one of the simplest and most easily explained parts of evolution. And the misunderstanding of this simple idea is rampant in the creationist community because they are as a rule unwilling to actually study evolution. They are looking for magic bullets on creationist websites, a sentence here or a sentence there, that will completely devastate the theory of evolution.
But guess what? Its not that easy. In 150 years, no such magic bullet has been found.
But to frame an answer to the question, here's a comparable analogy: if most Americans are descended from Europeans, why are there still Europeans?
The answer is left as an exercise for the student.
Those aren't transitionals because there is always room for another transitional between any two so-called transitionals!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.