Gravity is also far less understood than evolution is.

There is no gravity. The earth sucks :woot: :O:

I'm not aware of any theories, scientific or otherwise that can ever be proven. The best you can ever do is to disprove a theory, not prove it as it is completely impossible to prove anything using the scientific method (or any other method).

No evolution is a theory... a scientific theory, that attempts to explain observed events, and generalize them to future events (ie. predict). Evolution however is not a fact, at best only the observed events are facts (and even then I would argue that they are not really facts, due to the natural and unavoidable biases that exist within us at a biological level that prevent us from fully perceiving an event, and that is aside from all the other biases we are born with).

Furthermore the meanings between scientific theory and casual use are not all that different. A theory is simply an explanation, it is just that scientific theory tends to be a little bit more evidence based (meta-physical theory excluded as that is almost entirely logic based).

Actually the "theory" of gravity barely qualifies as a theory, since it offers no real explanation for the phenomena, just predictive formulae. So in other words we know what will happen, but have no clue as to why exactly.

I won't even begin to get into what is wrong with that site, but the author made numerous errors and should learn a little about the philosophy of science. This person's claims are just as ignorant as someone else claiming that it is "just a theory", just from the other end of the spectrum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

You're citing the positivist viewpoint proposed by Karl Popper, which I only somewhat agree with. For instance, it is indeed possible to prove that something happened, but it is impossible to prove that the conditions causing that occurence would always result in the same result (theory).

What irks me about the positivist philosophy is that it rests upon assumtions (fairly safe ones to be sure) that we cannot know with certainty anything EXCEPT that we cannot know anything with certainty. There's a logical default there.

Quite frankly I think it falls into the category of unimportant philosophical debate for a theory only needs to work for the applications it's relevant to for it to be factual in the pragmatic sense.Not to defend Mookie, but you're arguing something different than what he's positing. The "Theory of Evolution" and the fact of evolution are two different things. He's saying that evolution is a fact, and he is correct. You're saying that it is a scientific theory, and that is also correct. But that's apples to oranges.

It would be like me stating that the light bulb giving off light is a fact but that being counter with that it is only eletromagnetic theory which cannot be deemed a fact. It's a logical fallacy.There are plenty of actually theories surrounding gravity that are actual theories in the truest sense of the term, primarily that we know as the Theory of General Relativity, which explains gravity as the bending of space by all massive objects.

A theory is normally based on phenomena that have already been observed. Yes, they can be proven wrong, and no, they can't be proven right. But can you show where ID has anything to do with theory, or science? It's an imposition of religious belief onto science, with no other justification or evidence than "I believe"?

Does Aqua Buddha telling someone its true count as evidence? :hmmm:


:88)

Indeed. If it cannot be tested against the scientific method, it's not science and does not deserve to be treated as such or given the same weight as such.

What...? Another discussion on scientific theory, that short after the last one?

Scientific methodology has been explained so often in so short time now, it must not be done once again.

On scientific theories, we simply need to remember just this: that the only thing we can be certain of, is the fact that in the process of perception, something happenes to/with us. We already cannot be sure anymore what it is, and whether or not what we perceive is indeed like it seems to us that it is. And the meaning of it - is a completely different story anyway (if things have a meaning indeed). Science and theory do not produce the final, the last evidence for something, we only see a theory as highly valid if it produces overwhelming empirical evidence for it's predictions - but even that does not make it a conclusion of final and ultimate order (even if for reasons of sheer pragmatism we often act as if it would). We cannot observe something like "evolution" out there, like we cannot perceive light in its most essential, elemental form. Both terms are theories, created by us. All we do is perceiving something that already is turned into a form so that our biological senses can take note of it. The impression we form of it, already is the result of inventive constructional work being done in the brain. We do not see "colours" - the attribute of "red" and "blue" gets added to the electrical impulses in the optical nerves leading into our brains only. Hell, our eyes are not even capable to form sharp images on the retina - the impression of what we call a sharp, focussed image - is a quality added by our brain! Lense and cornea are not of that quality as if they would allow the forming of a sharp image on the retina. In fact, the picture they can prioduce, is quite blurry. "Sharpness" is something we add to our visual percepetion all by ourselves. Whether it represents any quality that is rooting in things "out there" indeed, we cannot be sure of.

We do not perceive "reality" itself. We invent and form and construct it. We do that in that way that we consider - by empirical evidence - to be the most helpful for us to navigate in this world and it'S challenges. That way, some ways make more sense than others. This is what scientific theory is about.

However:

Of Black Swans

And more

I tend to see existence like a title of a german book on physics from the 80s: "Die Welt is Klang", (=The world is sound). It means that in the end, it all seems to be and we all are just: waveforms, energy.

What...? Another post, that short after the last one?
:rotfl2:

I can understand your anger, but telling anyone what "must not be done" is a waste of time. People are going to do what they do.

:D

The difference between edit and quote buttons, I assume.

One piece of double posting KILLED.

What you should be worried about is the current crop of Marxists who want to turn your country into another Cuba! :cry:

Actually, I think that both theocrats and Marxists are equally worrisome.

Yes, but where exactly are these "current crop" of marxists?

Wrong. Evolution is the OBSERVATION that species evolve (change gradually) over time. Dig a hole. Find bones of critters that no longer exist, and find no bones of creatures that DO exist. Note that the deeper stuff is different than the more shallow, and none of the critters are extant. That means the fauna has changed over long time periods. That is evolution. That is observed.

Evolution is fact the same way gravity is fact. Drop an apple, and it doesn't hover or fall up. The theory of gravitation is the F=GmM/r^2 bit. Theories are models to explain observations. Models that have been tested and work.

The theory in "evolution" is the mechanism, Natural Selection, etc (there are a few minor variants). Not the fact that species are observed to change in time and geography.

Any alternate theory needs to adequately explain the fossil record.