Do you accept the theory of evolution? - Part 1

[KevanG]

Not according to some people.

I'm too out of it to explain it. Scroll back a bit and there'll be more than enough explanations to go around.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Isn't evolution a fact and not a theory?

There are two uses for the word "theory" in science. One you already know. The other means "explanation".

"Explanation of Evolution".

 

[Doctor Evo]

Isn't evolution a fact and not a theory?

It's both.

 

[KevanG]

DUNDUNDUUUUN!!!

Take that science.

 

[Dr.]

Isn't evolution a fact and not a theory?

It's both.

It has to do with the word “evolution” being used in two senses. The evidence (especially fossil evidence) shows that evolution as a phenomenon (biodiversity and complexity over geological time) has occurred - it is a fact. Separately, evolution (short for: the theory of evolution by natural selection) is the scientific model used to explain how the phenomenon occurred.

 

[Tanin]

The reason it's not called fact is more or less to save face. You never know what advances in science will hold and no one wants to be the person made fun of for believing things proven different 2000 years from now.

So they call science fact "theory" cause nothing is ever really 100% knowable.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

That's not true at all. Theories are based on facts, 100% true 100% of the time. The theory itself is merely the vehicle that explains this fact, there is a rigid definition of theory and what is applicable as such. The theory can only ever be an explanation.

For an analogy, if you are on a jury for a murder trial there is the simple fact that someone died. However the evidence forms the explanation as to how it happened, even with a recording of the murder, the jury still forms a theory.

Also, there are things that are 100% knowable, these are delegated as laws because they apply everywhere in the universe, such as the Second Law of thermodynamics, which in an abridged version dictates all energy from order to disorder.

 

[Tanin]

Until it's dis-proven. There is always a chance of that.

 

[Teelie]

If evolution were made into a law we'd have to arrest a few people for breaking it.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Until it's dis-proven. There is always a chance of that.

If you're talking about evolution, evolution itself isn't ever likely to be disproven (it would require something monumental like every species that ever existed on Earth was stolen and brought to Earth).

What's more likely is the vehicles regarding evolution will be amended and improved, which has happened in the past, and actually makes the theory stronger.

If you're talking about laws Scientific laws are not wrong, they are a distillation of facts into a sentence, it's basically just saying "x happens". If a scientific law were shown to be wrong. The universe would not exist.

For example, if the laws of gravity changed (ie mass attracts mass was false): All structure in the universe would fall apart.

If the second law of thermodynamics was wrong that would have catastrophic implications on the universe with entropy and the arrow of time no longer existing and potentially introduce a new dimension to the universe where you could travel "sideways" in time.

They may just not always be applicable, or work better with future developments. Like Newton's Law of Gravitation.

 

[Doctor Evo]

EDIT: Nevermind, that might be too pedantic.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Until it's dis-proven. There is always a chance of that.

Not really. Evolution will be fine tuned, but not disproven.

Or, as Shepherd put it, much more eloquently.

 

[Breogan]

If you followed the search for and discovery of Tiktaalik, read Shubin's Inner Fish, etc..., you might enjoy the new series.

Now Playing: Episode 1: Your Inner Fish - http://www.pbs.org/your-inner-fish/watch/

 

[Breogan]

Part 2 on tonight Wednesday April 16 at 10/9c- http://www.thirteen.org/programs/your-inner-fish/#episode-2-your-inner-reptile--preview