20RP12/Pingvin: Announcement

[TJ in Oregon]

Audience member: Do you believe in the theory of Evolution?

20RP12: It should not be labeled a "theory" because it is scientific fact. It has been proven that people evolved from animals and that animals are continuing to evolve. Slowly, but they are. It's not a "theory," it's a fact.

How can we call evolution a “fact” rather than a “theory” when it is based on experimentally verified hypothesis that have been tested and not proven wrong? It would be completely inconsistent to call it that when so many other pieces of our scientific knowledge, which have been experimentally verified, such as Perturbation Theory, the Theory of Relativity, Quantum Theory, Cell Theory, etc, are “theories” rather than “facts”. That isn’t to say evolution did not happen. I just would a like a clarification of these differences in terminology because a non-standard usage of definitions needs to be explained.

[TJ in Oregon]

A theory and a fact are entirely different things.

A theory is a falsificationable hypothesis supported by evidence that has been tested and has not been disproven. A fact is a single objective verifiable observation. A theory takes facts and fits them into a framework that can be used to explain how those facts are reconciled and often predict future results. It doesn’t make any sense to say evolution is a “fact”. This has nothing to do with people wanting to project some kind on uncertainty on to evidence for evolution; a fact and a theory are simply not the same thing.

I apologize if this is getting a little off track, but I can’t let something that wrong slide!

[TJ in Oregon]

Congratulations on your election! I am looking forward to working with you next term.