Observe constantly that all things take place by change,
and accustom thyself to consider that the nature of the Universe loves
nothing so much as to change the things which are, and to make new things
like them. – Marcus Aurelius
I know what you
are thinking, "A fact you say." Yes that is what I said and I will
go on to explain. Biologists have had a notoriously bad time attempting
to explain many scientific concepts to the general public and evolution
is at the top of the list.
First, some definitions to help clear things
up:
Evolution: The change in frequency of the
expressions of genes in a population over time.
Theory: One of the biggest problems
with understanding evolution is the confusion over the word, theory. In a
scientific sense, theory is the explanation
of a large body of collected facts that is currently accepted by the scientific
community. Thus a theory is a well supported model or explanation of a process that we
can observe. By well supported, scientists have tested the theory with numerous
precise, falsifiable and repeatable experiments. We are familiar with the
gravitational theory, electromagnetic theory, plate tectonics and the special
and general theory of relativity. All have been experimentally verified. Likewise,
numerous precise and repeatable
experiments have validated the various aspects of the Theory of Evolution.
All too often, terms similar to theory are confused with it.
Theory in lay terms is more similar to conjecture or hypothesis than its
scientific usage. This confusion is played upon by unscrupulous groups
attempting to further agendas not based on scientific principle.
Conjecture: A proposed explanation before it has been observed (much less
tested). The current state
of Intelligent Design is at best a conjecture as there have been no
scientifically conducted tests to support the claims made so far. This is the
weakest construct in developing a theory. Simply put it is an idea that
someone has prior to any work.
Hypothesis: A proposed explanation of certain facts or observations.
This is the first step in a scientific inquiry. To conduct an experiment, one
needs to have a hypothesis to test. A hypothesis is a statement that should
also be falsifiable. Much of creationism fails any scientific standard because
of this requirement. In non-scientific settings theory and hypothesis are often commingled. A
scientific theory is not a hypothesis at all but a well-tested, logically
structured, falsifiable view of some part of the universe.
Falsifiable: A statement is falsifiable if a test or experiment
can be conducted that would show the statement to be false. The statement, "All
men are bald" is falsifiable by observing at least one hirsutely headed man. The
statement "God exists" is not falsifiable as there is currently no way to disprove
this statement. Likewise, the statement "God does not exist" is also not
falsifiable. Statements about metaphysical objects or processes are inherently
unscientific - they cannot be falsified.
Fact: A statement providing information that has
objective reality. Natural selection alters the genetic make-up of a population
is a fact. Mutation alters the genetic make-up of an individual is also a fact.
Numerous scientific studies have demonstrated these facts.
Truth: Something best left for
philosophers to argue over.
