[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 483 KB, 523x700, imagejz.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2971590 No.2971590 [Reply] [Original]

Why is the evolution theory just a theory? What seperates it from being a fact? All the evidence is there, I'm just curious why it's still a theory.

>> No.2971597

>>2971590
Christians.

>> No.2971598

>>2971590
Its pretty much as factual as you can get. You could refer to it as a fact if you want.

>> No.2971602

because carbon dating results are inconsistent

>> No.2971600

Because it's a theory not a hypothesis. Learn the difference.

>> No.2971607

how can you believe in electromagnetism when it's just a theory (a gauss)?

>> No.2971610
File: 57 KB, 416x431, trollthread.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2971610

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=definition%3A+theory

>> No.2971611
File: 290 KB, 533x746, 1266981023194.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2971611

Dude, you don't even GET scientific processes. There is nothing "beyond" a theory. Theory is the top, a successful theory is "this is how all the data shows things work".

The only thing more 'solid' than a theory would be a "law", and Laws can only apply to absolute mechanics. Evolution can occur as well as not occur from sheer chance, therefore it cannot be the absolution known as a law.

>> No.2971612

OP here, we were having a discussion in religion class, and the teacher believed in intelligent design. I pointed out to evolution, and she just said: "That's just a theory." So she thinks it's not a fact but it actually is?

>> No.2971613

>>2971598
No you couldn't. Please leave /sci/ forever.

Facts are directly-observed data without any interpretation.

>> No.2971615

scientific theory ~ fact

Consider it the principle of evolution

>> No.2971621

This has been answered in full detail before actually:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=scientific+theory+versus+regular+theory

>> No.2971628

>>2971607

Alright, I may be the only one who got this, but, I loled.

To OP:

Gravity is also just a theory. I would suggest that those who do not believe theories to be true, test them by stepping off a cliff and checking if they fall.

I support experimental evidence.

>> No.2971631

Why is the gOD theory still a theory? What seperates it from being nonsense? No the evidence is not there, I'm just curious why it's still a theory.

>> No.2971630

>>2971611

>absolution

Absolution does not being "the act of being absolute", it means "the act of being absolved".

HEIL GRAMMAR

>> No.2971636

Evolution is a method of describing why the world is the way it is. Since this makes it a purely abstract concept (the process of change doesn't physically exist, it's only comparative relations between physical things), it will never be considered a fact.

This applies to all human-born concepts of how things work. The way to determine which theory works best is by how well it correlates with data (these data are empirical facts: fossils, DNA, anatomy, etc). Right now, the theory of evolution is an explanation of the diversity of life that fits observed facts better than any other theory.

>> No.2971639

Only the religionisticals call it a "thewowy" because it goes against their superstitionism. They don't really care about the truth.

It's like arguing with a heroin addict, you can't talk him out of it..

>> No.2971642

Science is inherently flawed. Even if you observe and reproduce something a trillion times, you still can't say it will occur that way every time.

>> No.2971663

>>2971636

This post has been most helpful, I can take the discussion to the next level with this.

>> No.2971666

>>2971642

Why are you saging you asswhipe? These are interesting discussions.

>> No.2971673

>>2971666

>Why is the evolution theory just a theory?

Because ignorance.

>> No.2971684

>>2971666
>doesn't understand sage

>> No.2971722

>>2971663
>I can take the discussion to the next level with this.
you mean like
>evolution is just an abstract concept it doesn't actually exist hurp derr knowledge is opinion derp

>> No.2971737

>>2971590
Your confusing the scientific definition of theory whith the common one
a theory is a notion supported by laws and magnitudes of research

>> No.2971748

>>2971642
And my hatredfilled contempt got fueled one step higher. Thank you anon.

>> No.2971772

>>2971748

It's true you dumb faggot. Go get some learnin.

>> No.2971773

>>2971607
>>how can you believe in electromagnetism when it's just a theory (a gauss)?

approved
I would have also accepted

>>how can you believe in female wildebeest when it's just a theory (a gnuess)?

>> No.2971813

>>2971628
Neither gravity nor evolution are theories. They are processes.

The there are 3 or 4 theories of gravity, and there are likewise several theories of evolution, but if you just say "gravity" or "evolution" you are not referring to a specific theory.

Usually when the uneducated masses say "evolution" they are referring to the Theory of Universal Common Descent.

>> No.2971833

>>2971772
Sound like a true Religionistical in its best form. Emotionally distressed, selfabsorbed, irrational, led astray, confident and foremost deluded above all.

One question to you you demon. How many gODS don't you believe in?

>> No.2971835
File: 9 KB, 447x349, 1301832520140.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2971835

>>2971607
lol i c wat u did thar

>> No.2971847

a fact is a just single thing that happened.
a theory is the thing at work behind all the facts.

>> No.2971848

>>2971833

I don't know what the fuck are you talking about, I'm not religious in any way. But science is not a flawless system of undeniable truth you uneducated retard. Take your creepy cultish attitudes towards science as some sort of divine teachings somewhere else.

>> No.2971872

"Theory" refers to the models and ideas used to understand scientific phenomena. So evolutionary theory refers to things like natural selection, arms races, genetic drift, the hardy-weinberg equation etc. Humans evolved from an ape which was the common ancestor of us and chimps, which itself shared a common ancestor with gorillas and so forth is a fact. General descriptions of allopatric and sympatric speciation, the reasons why seperate gene pools or breeding populations will diverge over time, how competition between prehumans could drive evolution of intelligence etc are part of theory.

>> No.2971878

Because da science is full of dem nerd asspie niggaz, scienticists keep on saying dat gay slang witch my niggaz nuh understand instead of gettin' on with da program like the rest. Naamean?

(scientists are pedantic faggots and this causes confusion in the uneducated masses)

>> No.2971879

>>2971612
Sorry, but your teacher is an idiot.
Theory, in scientific terms, is as close as you can get to 'fact' when dealing with a process.
Facts, in science, are nothing more than data points. 'This happened at this time'. They do not seek to explain anything, merely give data.

So, yes, the theory of evolution (rather, the several theories it's comprised of) is not a fact, they are theories. This is a good thing. It means it's supported by a vast array of facts.

>> No.2971956
File: 38 KB, 562x437, 1298215233865.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2971956

>>2971613
>directly-observed data without any
interpretation

states the impossible

>> No.2971978

>>2971848
>not a flawless system of undeniable truth
except that is the entire point of science

>> No.2971984

>>2971956
That's what a fact is, fucking retard.

>> No.2971987

>>2971978
>a flawless system of undeniable truth
>the entire point of science
This is what 6th graders actually believe.

>> No.2972006
File: 13 KB, 261x345, 70555870871094645.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2972006

>>2971984
It is impossible to observe anything without some form of interpretation.

>> No.2972009
File: 80 KB, 634x600, 1293417184248.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2972009

>>2971978
>>2971984

>> No.2972019
File: 83 KB, 750x600, 1269650852373.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2972019

>>2971978

>> No.2972029
File: 48 KB, 740x419, 1277031751910.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2972029

>>2971613

>> No.2972033

>>2972006
Subject A said that he felt pain in his chest

Tell me where there is interpretation

>> No.2972077
File: 64 KB, 600x480, 1277242324010.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2972077

>>2972033
His brain, your brain, and everyother fucking thing in between. You are constrained by you biology, to interpret the world through your biology.

How can you be certian that subejct 'A' actually felt the chest pain? That is not somthing you can actually know, you just have to take his world for it, don't you? So, it is not really a fact (like you are define fact). Becuase it requires your intrepretation on his truthfulness (in the very least).

Also, its not a fucking fact (as you are define fact) that 'A' even told you he had chest pain. Maybe you fucking imagined that shit, maybe your didnt hear him correctly, maybe your brain is malfucntioning, etc. You claiming that "A reported chest pain", involves your intrepretation of a variety of factors, whether you realize you are interpreting shit or not.

We do not have a "direct" veiw of "facts" or even the univserse. All we see is a "filtered and interpreted" version.

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

>> No.2974052

>>2972077
But how do we know that we don't have souls?