RE: [asa] fact vs. theory

He wasn't making the point of Evolution is "just" or "only" a Theory and
thus not as certain as a Fact. In that sense, people aren't using Theory as
it is used in science and are using "theory" in a vernacular sense, as
merely one of the rungs on a ladder of certainty. Somewhere along your
discussion, he got the impression that you were using these terms in the
vernacular.
======

> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On Behalf Of Dehler, Bernie
> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:23 AM
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: [asa] fact vs. theory
>
>
> An atheist in my discussion group wrote the following. Any
> comments? It doesn't seem right to me to say the heliocentric
> model is a theory, not a fact. I think his (unstated) point is
> that evolution is a theory, but it is still very solid just as
> the heliocentric view of the solar system is only a theory.
>
> ...Bernie
>
> - - - -
> He wrote:
>
> I'd like to point out the difference between a scientific fact
> and the English word 'fact'. The geocentric model was never a
> scientific fact... just as the heliocentric model is not a
> scientific fact. These are both scientific theories. The
> scientific facts are the measurements of planets' movements in
> the sky relative to the earth.
>
> "facts" are the measurable and repeatable data points. These
> don't change, though the error bars for the measurement get
> smaller and smaller as we get more sensitive equipment.
>
> "theories" are the constructs that generalize the thousands of
> facts that have been observed. They "fill in the gaps" between
> the measured facts, and allow us to predict where we can measure
> future facts to verify or repeal the theory. Much of the data
> facts that we observe initially have large error bars which often
> lead us to wrong generalized conclusions. Once the data is
> refined with better or more measurements, we often will modify
> the theories with more specific ones (Newton's Laws of Motion -->
> Einstein's Relativity).
>
> Only once we had telescopes did we have a sensitive enough
> measurement device to measure the precise movement of the planets
> in the sky. It was these more accurate (smaller error bar) facts
> that allowed us to see that the heliocentric model was more
> correct than the geocentric model.
>
> In the English language, we call the heliocentric model a "fact"
> because it's a scientific theory that has so many scientific
> facts to support it ... which is another way of saying true
> beyond a reasonable doubt. In the English language "fact" =
> Truth. In science, "fact" simply means a data point with a
> certain error bar. A "fact" in science is not all that meaningful
> (at least compared to a theory). But, facts don't change; theories do.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.17/1931 - Release Date:
> 2/2/2009 7:21 PM
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Feb 3 13:09:07 2009