 |
|
|
|
| In Science, The Term “theory” Does Not Translate To “opinion” Or “speculation”. |
| In the scientific community, the word “theory” is defined as “a set of analyzed facts, principles, or propositions used to explain certain phenomenon”. A scientific theory must also be capable of predicting future occurrences concerning the same phenomenon mentioned within the theory itself. In the science “hierarchy”, a theory is actually at the top (above facts and hypotheses). This misunderstanding is often exploited, mainly by Intelligent Design proponents, in an attempt to undermine scientific theories like evolution. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what you're saying is that scientific laws, accepted principals, come from theories. And that
theories come from facts and that facts are, in term, that which make up yet another law and
therefore lead us to critical thinking, which lead us to a hypothesis and thus lead us to an
experiment and thus lead us to data and thus lead us to a theory and thus can be formed into a
scientific law...
Fact.
Hypothesis.
Experiment.
Collect Data.
Form Theory.
And the next step up would be law, whether or not that theory becomes a law, or not.
Hm? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You left out the full description of a Theory. In order to qualify it’s got to be used to
accurately predict a preponderance of related data that will be found through research or
experimentation. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree, well said.
I would think most theories are facts.
Like the theory of our circulatory system in which states; veins bring blood to our heart, and
arteries flow blood away from our heart. In reality, this is a fact.
You just can't see it with the naked eye. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Theory is indicative of unproven idea.
Opinion is what you think.
Fact is what reality says it is and is proven.
Speculation is what you do in the stock market every morning;-) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sorry Hizashi. I know what you're getting at but it's convoluted. Accepted theories usually have
sets of facts which are used but fall short of putting the entire theory together...at which point
the theory would become a fact.
In some cases, these sets of facts end up being wrong as a set. What was thought to be a set of
facts which proved "that" ended up being 2 sets of facts which prove "this".
I'm truly sorry you are so frustrated with "creationists". I don't really think they're that big a
deal. People trying to preserve "christianity" in the secular world makes no sense. So it's not
surprising they make no sense. But to argue with them on your grounds is going nowhere.
You should have me debate against their claims. See. I can debate against them in their world. Based
on their beliefs. Easy as pie. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Some times people confuse me they don't believe in faith but fact when you have to have just as much
faith in religion |
| |
 bre  01 Sep 2008 06:03
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
A scientific theory is never "above" a scientific law.
But the word "theory" is used differently by scientists than by laypeople. There can be an
"established" theory within the community, while something can be "just" a theory outside of it.
So maybe I should be posting this on the other side, but it seemed lonely over here... |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 For and Against Recent Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sign In
