The theory of evolution is a scientific theory. So... that means evolution is theoretical, it is just an idea? Not something that has been proven? In which case creationism is just as viable a theory right?
ABSOLUTELY NOT
I sat through a 15 minute power point presentation from some kid about how evolution was just a theory and creationism is on equal foot and has better evidence. Too bad he was speaking to a philosophy class and everyone besides him knew the truth. Evolution has been proven - many many times over again. In fact, evolution has never been disproved. If something is shown to be wrong, then it cannot be a scientific theory without being remodeled. Scientific theories have withstood intensive testing and have only ever been shown right. As quoted from the University of Rochester:
A scientific theory or law represents an hypothesis, or a group of related hypotheses, which has been confirmed through repeated experimental tests[...] The validity that we attach to scientific theories as representing realities of the physical world is to be contrasted with the facile invalidation implied by the expression, "It's only a theory." For example, it is unlikely that a person will step off a tall building on the assumption that they will not fall, because "Gravity is only a theory."Evolution has not been put to trial nearly as many times as gravity, but it has been and is continually tested. Creationists often try to knock evolution by saying, "It's only a theory." Now you know a little better what being a theory means. Only being a theory is damn impressive. Very few things every make it to the status of Law. Almost all scientific facts are actually theories. Creationists will try to put creationism on equal footing with evolution and claim that creationism can be a scientific theory too - it is not and cannot be a scientific theory. Creationism evokes supernatural claims which are not testable. However everything creationism describes about the natural world is easily falsifiable. The world is not 6,000 or 10,000 years old, try 4.5 billion. Creationists come up with 'clever' ways to make people who know little to nothing about real science believe that science is deeply flawed; they quote stupid radiation experiments to disprove evolution and claim that carbon dating is drastically wrong and go on and on.
There is a reason creationists' evidence and theories never make it to scientific journals and why their work is so easily set aside - and it is not a big conspiracy by all scientists to discredit creationism. Evolution happens - hence many creationists concede to micro-evolution but not macro-evolution. Micro-evolution means that animals like dogs can change - but they never become a totally different animal, for example horse don't become whales. Oh, wait - primitive horses did become whales. Oh shit! The problem people have is grasping time spans of millions of years. Wolves have been bred to become chihuahuas in only some thousands of years. Millions of years passing is unfathomable - a wolf could easily be imagined to become a frog in the time span. If a being from another planet were to show up here on Earth he would clearly see wolves and Shih Tzus as different species - Macro-evolution. For you science types out there - string theory is another example of bullshit dressed up as a theory. String theory has not been tested and is in no way at the level of a scientific theory. It cannot currently be tested experimentally. Also, always remember that science is not above criticism and nothing can be proven 100%. Calling something a scientific fact ensures that it has been reliable but not that it always shall be or that it is perfect. Often science rests on empirical observations that could be wrong for a host of reasons, the most powerful of which is that our mind constructs our sensory experiences. Evolution is a scientific theory and like most science, it has only ever proven right; this does not imply that the theory of evolution will never be modified or that no alternatives could exist. However, there is not other explanation that can stand on equal footing to be compared to evolution - which will probably only undergo very slight modifications in the future.
Perhaps god created everything as is including fossils and the carbon levels and the layers of rock and vestigial body parts. Sounds like a lot of unnecessary work for a universe with a god and it sounds like he deliberately wishes to fool us but alright. So he's a tricky son of a gun who wanted to create a world that would appear to be completely godless... so why does he want praised then?
-------
If I hear someone discredit evolution as just a theory again - or when I read about public schools wishing to teach creationism I'm going to snap.
If you don't believe me read "The Origin of Species" dang it.
2 comments:
I like the way you wrote this article, mostly pure logical reasoning with some facts (enough to get the point across) and then pure emotional feelings at the end, with a little humor.
I absolutely agree with you that creationism is and will never be on the same level as evolution. The state should not appease religious people by allowing creationism to be taught in school. If this happens, then are we to teach string theory (made up to show how silly creationism is) also?
I have no idea where you are going with that string theory remark. I think you should wiki string theory.
Post a Comment