Do you think it is the most likely to be true theory we have so far, though?
General, General Thread Page 821
Quote: Simon Stratton @ July 21 2008, 2:43 PM BSTEvolution isn't treated like law, it's just treated like the best explanation we have at the moment. Seems to match more of the evidence than any other theories. Which it fair enough surely?
But I don't agree. Why was I told at school that 'we evolved from blah which evolved from blah'? This is a statement, just the same as 'rain falls because of gravity'. They don't say this 'may' be the case, they say it is.
Quote: Simon Stratton @ July 21 2008, 2:43 PM BSTEvolution isn't treated like law, it's just treated like the best explanation we have at the moment. Seems to match more of the evidence than any other theories. Which it fair enough surely?
My theory is we are a bi product after a interstella trucking accident dropped its load of novelty cosmic wigs, the wigs needed to survive so grew lumbering bodies to carry them around.
Quote: zooo @ July 21 2008, 2:43 PM BSTDo you think it is the most likely to be true theory we have so far, though?
I think it's the only theory we have so far(?), so I don't really have much to choose between.
I would love to see it proven definitely. But it isn't, and while all these questions exist I can't feel comfortable with it. I don't want to have to say it must be true by default.
I was always taught about "the theory of evolution". What we're told is fact in so much as it is fact that it is part of the theory. But I don't recall it having been stated that this was definitely what had happened.
But then I was too off my head on drugs and remember basically nothing of my school days, so ignore this post.
Well I was taught that much of evolution can be proven, some of it can't be, but that it is the most likely theory to be true.
To be honest, I'd rather be taught erroneously that evolution was fact, than what increasing numbers of American schools are teaching as fact. Creationism is a much more dangerous lie than evolution could ever be.
Quote: Aaron @ July 21 2008, 3:00 PM BSTBut then I was too off my head on drugs and remember basically nothing of my school days, so ignore this post.
Wh-wh-what?!?
For drugs, read sherbert dip dabs.
Phew!
Quote: Aaron @ July 21 2008, 3:00 PM BSTI was always taught about "the theory of evolution". What we're told is fact in so much as it is fact that it is part of the theory. But I don't recall it having been stated that this was definitely what had happened.
I've seen so many wildlife docs where they say stuff like 'this creature evolved this to overcome such and such'.
I've looked at some of my 6 year old nephew's text books where there are pictures showing a big rock falling from space and forming life and the start of the evolutionary chain.
I myself as I mentioned left school not even considering that evolution could be wrong, and I'm willing to bet a good 90% of us take it completely for granted because we see it shown as fact everywhere we turn.
Quote: ian_w @ July 21 2008, 2:39 PM BSTEvolution has many merits and you could no doubt throw lots of points at me that I would just agree with. But I will take it as nothing more than conjecture until something emerges that proves it beyond reasonable doubt and fills in the many holes which are yet to be filled.
Welcome to the world of science, then. Modern theory of science (as a meta theory) does not demand proof for something to be scientific. Quite the contrary. The central criterion for a theory to be scientific is falsifiability. That's why "Pink cows exist" does not qualify as a scientific statement. You can always say "You just haven't found them yet, they might hide on Mars!". Unfalsifiable. A scientific theory is a system of falsifiable statements that are best supported by facts. Whereby facts are not *truths* but the results of scientific measuring. All of it, the theory, the measuring and the facts can turn out to be wrong at any moment.
Schiller wrote that if you're not prepared to accept that all your work can turn out to be wrong at some point and cannot be used any further, then you shouldn't become a scientist.
The problem I see is that scientific methods and principles are not taught well enough to enable people to assess scientific knowledge critically. And ridiculous specialisation in science produces a gap between the state of scientific knowledge and our understanding of the world. That's why people suddenly start to believe in witchcraft again. The knowledge gained in the ivory tower isn't passed down to us average people anymore. So one has to trust the specialists or go the witchcraft short-cut. :-)
Quote: zooo @ July 21 2008, 3:02 PM BSTWell I was taught that much of evolution can be proven, some of it can't be, but that it is the most likely theory to be true.
To be honest, I'd rather be taught erroneously that evolution was fact, than what increasing numbers of American schools are teaching as fact. Creationism is a much more dangerous lie than evolution could ever be.
I wouldn't want to be taught erroneously about anything.
By the way though, it's interesting, while we're on the subject of dangerous, that some of evolution's earliest and loudest supporters have been people with an equally avid passion for eugenics. I wish we could go away from creationism though, as though you're either one or the other.
I'm just saying, unless you've got something else to replace the theory of evolution with, I don't think you're going to get anywhere. We have to put something in the text books!
And the only other theories we have right now are mentalist crazy ones. But yes, we can stop going on about that one in particular if you want.
You can never prove a theory beyond reasonable doubt, only say it is the best possible theory. This probably will disillusion you even more, but the theory of gravity isn't universally correct either. It breaks down when you get down to the quantum level.
Quote: Simon Stratton @ July 21 2008, 3:27 PM BSTYou can never prove a theory beyond reasonable doubt, only say it is the best possible theory. This probably will disillusion you even more, but the theory of gravity isn't universally correct either. It breaks down when you get down to the quantum level.
Thats right. They have several different scientific theories and some scientist use certain thoeries as a base otehr use different I was amazed by that when I read Stephen Hawkins book I thought it was like "this is how this is" and they all agree but they don't