Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
SIGH...
Have you even read the rest of this thread? Do you understand the scientific method, the concept of falsifiability, what the word "theory" means to a scientist, or the basic idea that there is no such thing as an indisputable scientific fact?
I'm ostensibly "on your side" in the evolution vs. creationism debate, but you're not helping our cause by making ill-informed comments like in your post above.
|
Well I think you're misinterpreting evman a bit. I think what he's saying, which I agree with, is that science needs to change its language a bit because of this prevailing storm of anti-intellectualism that gains a great deal of ground off the ambiguousness of the word "theory".
Science and its adherents are too nice. They're too diplomatic because as you point out they are happy to say "well we could be wrong!" Unfortunately, their pitted against the truly dogmatic that take any sign of weakness or culpability as "not good enough". If we start calling our "theories"
facts it gets rid of this confusion for the laymen.