Is evolution a theory?

[Wiccan_Child]

Simple question with a 'yes' or 'no' answer. I'm leaving the terms of the poll undefined, so please leave a post with your own definitions of 'evolution' and 'theory', and perhaps a short explanation of your answer.

Danke!

 

[RickG]

Simple question with a 'yes' or 'no' answer. I'm leaving the terms of the poll undefined, so please leave a post with your own definitions of 'evolution' and 'theory', and perhaps a short explanation of your answer.

Danke!

I guess from the perspective of scientific investigation, yes. Theories are never proven.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes -- evolution is a theory.

I define evolution as: Δ[sub]alleles[/sub]/T

Theory = an educated guess, based on empirical observation, pending falsification.

U bent van harte welkom!

 

[thaumaturgy]

Theory = an educated guess, based on empirical observation, pending falsification.

You mean as opposed to how scientists use the term "theory"?

Theory: A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. (SOURCE)

I think what you mean, AV, is "Hypothesis".

An hypothesis is an educated guess based on observation. (ibid)

At least that is how it is usually taught to 6th graders and above.

 

[Jazer]

Simple question with a 'yes' or 'no' answer. I'm leaving the terms of the poll undefined, so please leave a post with your own definitions of 'evolution' and 'theory', and perhaps a short explanation of your answer.

Danke!

That depends if you honor the marriage of evolution and genetics. Evolution is a theory, genetics is a fact. If you want to join them together then you have talk origin making statements like "evolution is a fact and a theory". Genetics today is considered to be 99.9999% accurate. Or 1 in 100,000 rate of error. Although when you take human error into consideration I doubt if you can consider it to be that accurate.

 

[TheBear]

Theory = an educated guess, based on empirical observation, pending falsification.

Science Works! Scientific Theory Explained - YouTube

 

[Jazer]

Theories are never proven.

The additive and subtractive color theory have not been proven. Yet we use them every day in many ways. With the multi verse theory science today tends to lean toward everything is real rather than to say nothing is real.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

You mean as opposed to how scientists use the term "theory"?

Theory: A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. (SOURCE)

I think what you mean, AV, is "Hypothesis".

An hypothesis is an educated guess based on observation. (ibid)

At least that is how it is usually taught to 6th graders and above.

His definition, as given, encompasses both hypotheses and theories. What is a theory if not an educated guess? What is a theory if it's not grounded in empirical observation? What is a theory if it's not awaiting falsification?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

That depends if you honor the marriage of evolution and genetics. Evolution is a theory, genetics is a fact. If you want to join them together then you have talk origin making statements like "evolution is a fact and a theory". Genetics today is considered to be 99.9999% accurate. Or 1 in 100,000 rate of error. Although when you take human error into consideration I doubt if you can consider it to be that accurate.

Interesting fact. If a test is accurate 99,999 times out of 100,000, and you want to test for something that occurs in 1 in 10,000 people - i.e., a very accurate test for a very rare thing - how many false positives will there be? That is, if this test is used to jail people, how many innocents will be jailed?

Those jailed equal true positives plus false positives. In a population of X, there are (1/10000 * 99999/100000)X guilty people in jail, and (9999/10000 * 1/100000)X innocent people. The ratio of those figures is (9999/10000 * 1/100000)/(1/10000 * 99999/100000) = 0.1.

In other words, if we use an extremely accurate test to jail people for something that's rare in the overall populace (e.g., "predisposition to child abuse/terrorism/liberalism"), then using those statistics, a full 10% of people jailed by the test would be completely innocent.

Scary.

And tangential .

 

[Jazer]

In other words, if we use an extremely accurate test to jail people for something that's rare in the overall populace (e.g., "predisposition to child abuse/terrorism/liberalism"), then using those statistics, a full 10% of people jailed by the test would be completely innocent.

Scary.

Maybe but Texas had to release a lot of so called rapists because when they ran the DNA they found out they were innocent. DNA testing cost money so your going to have to have done something to cause them to want to spend the money to test you. They can only afford to put a small number of people in prison. So it should not be to difficult to stay out of that group.

 

[idscience]

micro-evolution is a theory, Macro-evolution is a hypothesis or less.

 

[Hobz]

Evolution is a theory.

Evolution: Descent with modification.

Theory: A verified hypothesis.

They can only afford to put a small number of people in prison. So it should not be to difficult to stay out of that group.

America has the largest prison population and the largest incarceration rate in the world, comments like that are scary.

On January 1, 2008 more than 1 in 100 adults in the United States were in prison or jail.

In 2008 approximately one in every 31 adults (7.3 million) in the United States was behind bars, or being monitored (probation and parole). In 2008 the breakdown for adults under correctional control was as follows: one out of 18 men, one in 89 women, one in 11 African-Americans (9.2 percent), one in 27 Latinos (3.7 percent), and one in 45 whites (2.2 percent).

From: Incarceration in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Evolution is a theory.

Evolution: Descent with modification.

Theory: A verified hypothesis.

Could you define 'verified'?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

micro-evolution is a theory, Macro-evolution is a hypothesis or less.

Could you define your terms, please?

 

[Elendur]

Yes. Evolution is a theory per definition.

There really isn't much more to say.

Edit: I will not post my informal definitions since they will always stand corrected when confronted with the formal definitions.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution is a theory.

 

[Hobz]

By verified I mean it the hypothesis has been tested and confirmed to be compatible with the rest of science. Usually experiment and peer review verify hypothesis.

The theories which actually get referred to as such like the "Theory of Evolution" and "Theory of Relativity" have a very large base of supporting evidence, however simple hypothesis such as "blue sky is caused by Rayleigh Scattering" are technically also theories once verified.

 

[Hobz]

Definition of Micro-Evolution: Evolution as described until I feel it violates my religious beliefs.

 

[Elendur]

Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution is a theory.

Gah! I fell for it! to you.

 

[David Jerome]

There's the theory of evolution, and there's the fact of evolution.

Evolution is observable through changes in microbes, plant cultivation and animal breeding; this would be the fact of evolution.

The theory of evolution would be a logical conclusion based on observable facts; for example, combine the fact of evolution, with archeological findings, the nested heirarchy of genetics (and so on so forth with oceans of other facts), and you have the theory of evolution.