Username: Password:
Welcome! Please Sign In or Register

Theory of Evolution and Natural Selection

reviewed by GenghisTheHun

GenghisTheHun
11/10/2009

Theory of Evolution and Natural Selection 3

UPDATED NOVEMBER 10. 2009: We should never lose sight of the concept that a scientific theory is more than just opinion or conjecture. A scientific theory is usually based upon a body of facts and observations from which conclusions can be drawn on a logical basis. Many scientific theories can be tested scientifically.

Examples of scientific theories are atomic theory, valence shell electron pair repulsion (VSEPR) theory, ligand close packing theory, theory of relativity, the theory of plate tectonics and so many more. For instance the germ theory of disease was highly controversial when proposed. Now it is the cornerstone of medicine. It is still a theory. Would anyone state that the germ theory of disease is just opinion or conjecture?

Another example is the cell theory. This theory arose about five hundred years ago when scientists began to conclude from study that the single cell was the building block of all life. Today this is universally accepted. Does anyone in the RIA hold that because it is called "cell theory" "it is just a theory and not a fact?" How many times have you heard that type of comment?

As far as evolution and natural selection is concerned, take a deep breath, set back, relax and let science take its course. Science will tell. Philosophy and doctrine must take a back seat to fact when proved by science.

ORIGINAL COMMENT: This should not be an issue but it continues in many parts of the country. The fundamentalist Protestant cult groups insist that their particular parsing of the Bible should be the law of the land. Reliance upon bronze age science must be shoved down everyone's throat.

Join to vote! 8 Helpful / 0 Funny / 4 Agree / 0 Disagree
Showing 4 Comments
You must be logged in to comment. login now.
twansalem commented 11 days ago.
Exactly! It seems like no one really understands what the word "theory" really means when it comes to science. I've tried to explain it around here numerous times, yet it always seems to fall on deaf ears.

twansalem commented 11 days ago.
Or maybe when RIA is involved, I should say, "blind eyes".

abichara commented 11 days ago.
@Genghis-- I wasn't claiming that there are certain scientific facts that are not verifiable. Many processes are in fact verifiable and in fact have been proven to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt. My point was that every scientific theory is based on, or starts out as some sort of conjecture arising from an observation of a given natural process. Some are proven, others aren't, and many others raise further questions that demand further exploration. That's the nature of scientific inquiry. Some like evolution are impossible to completely verify, given the time element involved. I also think there are elements of quantum physics that are very difficult to explain, that might be beyond our level of understanding.

I agree that we should allow the science take the course, as always. Technological advancements in particular will greatly facilitate expansion these areas in the upcoming years. Theories need to be proven, and there is an element of opinion, especially with regards to how they relate to other processes. That's what happens when questions are raised; this is, in fact, very healthy.

GenghisTheHun commented 11 days ago.
To abichara: I wasn't aiming at your post. It just reminded me to put in a plug to bolster the concept of scientific theory being more than just an opinion. I watch a lot of goober preaching once in a while to get the flavor of what is going on in that area, and I felt a need to add a little blather on the subject.
Showing 4 Comments
About This Reviewer
By the Numbers