Just a quick note to my readers (apparently there are more than one)…

I was looking up and reading random posts and articles and came across one I found humorous. It was a rather scientific post that quickly transformed from intelligent-sounding to hey-everybody-look-at-me-I’m-retarded-sounding. The turning point was this phrase: “the fact of evolution.”

Enough said

In case some people can’t figure out what’s wrong with that phrase, let me enlighten you. Most people refer to Evolution as a theory. A theory is one step past a hypothesis. What’s that? Well, a hypothesis is a guess (ie. “I bet a water balloon takes longer to explode in a microwave than an air-filled balloon”). Then it can get upgraded to a theory if there is reason to believe it’s true (ie. “Water is more dense than air and takes longer to heat up so the rubber shouldn’t melt as fast”). For a theory to become a law (or something that is assumed to be a fact), it must be tested in various ways until any perceivable objection has been settled. And even when something is declared to be law, its factuallity is still not secured. Many scientific “laws” have been disproven by later discoveries. So, for evolution to be a known fact, it must at least be proven as a law, which it hasn’t. Miriam Webster defines a law as

a statement of order or relation holding for certain phenomena that so far as is known is invariable under the given conditions

Invariable… in other words, something that is known to happen consistantly if the conditions were the same. Even if evolution WERE true (which I am thoroughly convinced it isn’t), we only have one instance of it, and it’s variables are entirely untestable and unprovable. I just hate people who contradict themselves by saying they hold to science, and then refer to evolution as anything more than a theory. Evolution is no more proven than creation, period.

Source for quote: Merriam-Webster’s Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Leave a Reply

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.