knowledge-database (beta)

Re: Evolution, Fact or Theory

From:	z
Subject:	Re: Evolution, Fact or Theory
Date:	21 Jan 2005 09:10:57 -0800

Cary Kittrell wrote:
> In article
buckeye-ELO@nospam.net writes:
> > "Jeff Strickland" wrote:
> >
> > >:|None of what you are saying is even remotely part of the
original post.
> > >:|
> > >:|Evolution is theory.
> >
> > Science is theory
> > Electricity is theory
> > A lot of law is theory
> > Some aspects of history is theory
> > Creationism is not factual, nor is it theory.
> > It is myth.
> >
> >
>
> Quantum theory is a theory.
>
> The theory of relativity is a theory.
>
>
> In predictive terms these two mere theories between them
> comprise the most successful accomplishments in the entire
> history of science.
>
> But they're just theories.
>
>
> -- cary

That's because science requires you to be able to doubt any and
everything, should future evidence cast doubt upon it. Nothing in
science is to be taken as absolutely proved true forever and ever.
Whereas religion requires to have faith in things that can't be proved,
no matter what kind of doubt may be cast upon them by factual evidence.
It makes a lot more sense to discuss evolution in a course on religion
than it does to inject creationism or its retarded cousin Intelligent
Design into a science course. You can argue God invented evolution on
the basis of faith, but you can't argue Creationism on the basis of
scientific evidence.