Evolution seems like it shouldn't be a theory anymore

Question

Evolve (verb) - to develop gradually

It is obvious that a child is genetically similar but slightly different than its parents. Its child is like but similar to its parents but slightly different than it and its partner. The child's child is similar to its parents but slightly different from it and its partner... and so on. Each child can develop some slight abnormalities/mutations that neither parent had. A person with a trait unfavorable for survival is less likely to reproduce than the average person while a person with an additional favorable trait is more likely to survive and reproduce. All individual statements are established truths and as a whole encompass the "theory" of evolution. So why is biological evolution still contested?

Even if we had never seen the process at work saying it doesn't exist would be like saying 159 354 doesn't equal 513 because no one has ever actually counted 159 and 354 stones or apples togethor, but we have seen evolution take place in microorganisms with short lifespans and seen it take place on a smaller scale with higher organisms.

Answer 1

Some people take the Bible too seriously. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Christian but I still believe in evolution. I think most religious people, especially out in the midwest, are too close-minded. They read the Bible and take everything that it says to be literal. They think that the Earth was really created in 7 days etc. But I think the Bible is full of symbolism, and maybe 7 days in God's eyes is like millions of years in mankind's eyes.

There is a lot of evidence to support evolution, the Big Bang etc. And in science, evidence = proof... anything else is just theory.

Answer 2

This is a perrennial problem, because people don't understand what "Law" and "Theory" mean in science.

It is NOT that "Law" means "proved", and "Theory" means "unproved".

Science makes two kinds of statements - Laws and Theories.

A Law is an OBSERVATION. For example - the Law of Gravity states that all matter attracts all other matter in a manner proportionate to their masses and inversely proportionate to their distance. It just observes that this happens, and does not explain how or why.

A Theory is the EXPLANATION. So there are several competing Theories of Gravity: perhaps all matter emits gravitons (massless subatomic particles with negative momentum), or perhaps all matter "curves" space/time, or perhaps all matter is composed of subatomic "superstrings" vibrating and interacting in higher spatial dimensions. These cannot all be true (and perhaps none of them is), but they each explain some of the observations of the Law. Note, however, that they can NEVER be proved, and can NEVER become a law - they are a different kind of statement: and explanation, not an observation.

For evolution, then, there are two possible meanings as used in Biology:

[1] that populations of organisms change in their characteristics over time. This is an observed FACT (see antibiotic resistant bacteria, the new 'flu virus each year, industrial melanism of the peppered moth, etc.) and could be called the "Law of Evolution".

[2] the "Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection", which takes this observation and explains how it happens (by Natural Selection). Like the above examples for gravity, this can never be proved 100%, but it is supported by so much evidence that it is irrational not to accept it as valid.

The problem is that some people roll the two together and claim that since the Theory is not/cannot be proved, that the Law is not happening either (which just demonstrates a shocking lack of knowledge about the scientific method).

Answer 3

Actually, you should be defining Theory which creationists take to mean it is still in doubt, a matter of opinion, while in science it merely the name for a set of hypotheses to be tested or that already have been tested.  

  Just for fun, start calling it the Law of Evolution and the Theory of Gravity.

Answer 4

Evolution can never become a law , but only due to terminology, not certainty.

A law is a statement or postulate that describes something in nature.

A theory is a model or framework that that can be used to make testable predictions.

Theories are complex statements that often include laws.  Ex. Theory of Electromagnetism contains Coulomb's Law.

As theories go evolution is as certain as possible.

Answer 5

As evolution is, itself, still evolving it is a theory.  A theory is not a hypothesis.  The modern evidence observed by scientists adds to and supports Darwin's original proposal.  Because more and more evidence is still being discovered, evolution remains a theory.  When all evidence is found, it will become a law.

Then, of course, there are the ignorant christians who want their beliefs to be considered a science without there being a whisper of evidence supporting their beliefs other than their beliefs.  Don't let that cult of fundigelicals affect the evidence.  

Always remember ... evolution is evidence looking for an explanation where intelligent design is an explanation looking for evidence.  

Answer 6

It's based on what the definition of 'Theory' is.  In science, a theory is a model that explains a set of phenomenons.  So calling evolution a theory is valid.

When discussing a subject, use the terms as appropriate to the subject. :)