Re: [asa] Is evolution a fact?

A theory by definition cannot be a fact. Evolution is both a theory and a fact; but the theory of evolution is not the same as the fact of evolution, although the theory leans on the fact.

The fact of evolution is abundantly and most compellingly evident in the fossil record: Fossils clearly indicate that organisms 500 million years ago were quite unlike organisms 100 million years ago which in turn were quite unlike organisms existing today. These changes in organisms are facts of evolution and taken together make evolution a fact.

In one sense this fact constitutes evolution even if all the different organisms were specially created. The theory of evolution involves itself with processes of change when you subtract out special creation. In other words, the theory says later organisms aren't just different from earlier ones but that they emerged from them.

The theory of evolution is not a fact but is well established as a theory because it elegantly accommodates the facts.

(Evolution whether theory or fact says nothing about the origin of life but addresses only changes in organisms.)

Don

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: George Cooper<mailto:georgecooper@sbcglobal.net>
  To: asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
  Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 4:26 AM
  Subject: RE: [asa] Is evolution a fact?

  Facts are taken as absolutes. The theory of evolution is comprised of
  scientific facts. Yet, I don't like the idea that a theory, as a whole,
  should be elevated into a fact. Once a theory is a fact, it is no longer a
  theory, at least in a general sense.

  Because we see change in things does not make what is known as the Theory of
  Evolution a fact. A rock thrown into the air changes its motion with time,
  this is a fact, but not evolution. It does behave in accordance with
  another theory -- gravity. We don't know what gravity is, so can we boldly
  say the entire theory is a fact. Einstein greatly changed this theory, and
  another could tweak it further.

  The Geocentric model was once a fact, and was so for almost 2000 years. I
  prefer to see the term "theory" bolstered for what it represents, without
  abuse by both opponents and proponents of science.

  George Cooper

  -----Original Message-----
  From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu<mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
  Behalf Of Dehler, Bernie
  Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 6:06 PM
  Cc: asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
  Subject: [asa] Is evolution a fact?

  What do you all think? I keep hearing some say that "evolution is a
  fact." I don't think so. Evolution is a grand overarching theory to
  explain how everything complex came from something very simple. How can
  it be a fact when certain parts are unknown, such as "origin of life."
  Therefore, isn't it an obvious error to say that "evolution is a fact?"

  I think Dawkins calls it a fact, as well as an evolutionary Christian I
  heard the other day in a DVD.

  To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
  "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

  To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
  "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed May 28 09:14:43 2008