Replies

I hope this isn't an attempt to play those silly little creationist games where you say that microevolution occurs but nobody has observed macroevolution. We have never witnessed a cat give birth to a dog and there are no transitional fossils.

No, this is just stating you do not know the difference between a theory and a fact. A fact is something like : The sun came up today. A theory is something like : based on our theories of radiometric dating and various other assumptions we make about surrounding environment where a fossil is found, we theorize this fossil is 20 million years old.

In addition, facts cannot be derived from theories, so you cannot say that based on all our theoretical age and type theories of fossils, evolution is a fact. Or, based on our finding that chimps and humans both have what we theorize is a retrovirus insertion in our DNA, and that based on our unproven assumption that the process is random, the odds are astronomical that we would not have a common ancestor with a chimp, and therefore it is a fact that we have common ancestor with a chimp.

I know the guy at talkorigins wants everyone to start calling evolution a fact (an attempt at propaganda), but you cannot do that without changing the definition of fact to mean what a theory means now.

I know the guy at talkorigins wants everyone to start calling evolution a fact (an attempt at propaganda), but you cannot do that without changing the definition of fact to mean what a theory means now.

Definitions:

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"; "true in fact and theory"
Fact: when an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact

That evolution occurs is a fact, otherwise we would not be worried about this bird flu kicking around (and evolving like mad apparently).

The explanation for how this evolution occurs is the theory of evolution, as opposed to the fact that things evolve (i.e., change through time). It is easy to get these two concepts confused.

"No, this is just stating you do not know the difference between a theory and a fact. A fact is something like : The sun came up today. A theory is something like : based on our theories of radiometric dating and various other assumptions we make about surrounding environment where a fossil is found, we theorize this fossil is 20 million years old.

It has been claimed that I do not know the difference between a fact and a theory. I'm in a real quandary now, unsure if the information I've been disseminating here for the past year is right or wrong. Please help me decide. Am I right or wrong?

"In addition, facts cannot be derived from theories, so you cannot say that based on all our theoretical age and type theories of fossils, evolution is a fact. Or, based on our finding that chimps and humans both have what we theorize is a retrovirus insertion in our DNA, and that based on our unproven assumption that the process is random, the odds are astronomical that we would not have a common ancestor with a chimp, and therefore it is a fact that we have common ancestor with a chimp.

It is astronomical isn't it.

"I know the guy at talkorigins wants everyone to start calling evolution a fact (an attempt at propaganda), but you cannot do that without changing the definition of fact to mean what a theory means now.

Which guy might that be? Which of the dozens of scientists there that agree with me might you be talking about?