evolution, part deux
Here's what i don't get about the argument for "alternatives to evolution." I'm not going to use the phrase "intelligent design" because it is simply a synonym for creationism, not necessarily attached to a specific religion but certainly creationism.
Evolution is science. Creationism is not. Public schools teach science. Whatever creationism is, it is NOT science.
I think that there is also some misunderstanding about the definition of the word "theory" in the phrase "theory of evolution" which is an example of the word being used in a scientific context.
The word "theory" does not simply mean "unproven idea" in science. It means: a foundational principle that has withstood a battery of attempts to falsify it.
wikipedia article: theory
Are there any "competing schools of thought" that offer alternatives to the pythagorean theory?
In science and fundamental rational thought, the lack of evidence against something does not constitute evidence for it.
Evolution is science. Creationism is not. Public schools teach science. Whatever creationism is, it is NOT science.
I think that there is also some misunderstanding about the definition of the word "theory" in the phrase "theory of evolution" which is an example of the word being used in a scientific context.
The word "theory" does not simply mean "unproven idea" in science. It means: a foundational principle that has withstood a battery of attempts to falsify it.
wikipedia article: theory
Are there any "competing schools of thought" that offer alternatives to the pythagorean theory?
In science and fundamental rational thought, the lack of evidence against something does not constitute evidence for it.
