So You Think Evolution is Scientific Fact?

By Rebecca Rosenburg, published Sep 17, 2007
Published Content: 59  Total Views: 12,085  Favorited By: 15 CPs
Rating: 3.0 of 5
When I was a child in elementary school and middle school I was very interested in science. I attended public schools, several of them as my family moved often. What was taught in science class- creationism or evolution? Actually, neither. When the subject of the origin of the world or life came up, the teachers would tell us there was no way to know for sure how the world came into being. We don't know why the dinosaurs became extinct. Many of us had parents who would teach us that God created life. Some had parents who said "yes, it really is a mystery. We'll probably never know." And a few had parents who told the story of evolution. Our science classes were complete, with the lessons on the difference between fact, theory, and hypothesis. We were taught that much of science is theory or even a hypothesis. All of our lessons were taught in such a way that we knew what was fact and what wasn't. And why. That has all changed. Most schoolchildren now don't know the difference between fact, theory, and hypothesis. They don't know that a scientific fact may not actually be truth. And they are taught that evolution is a fact.

For those who may have been asleep during the lessons on the Scientific Method, here is a recap. A common misperception of science is that science defines "truth". Science does not define truth. It actually defines a way of thought. The steps (simplified) to the scientific method are:

Hypothesis- Take a guess. (The earth is round.)

Observation/Experimentation- (Satellite photos show a round earth. Hired a pilot to fly in a straight line. She came back from the opposite direction and said she flew in a complete circle around the earth.)

Data/Graphs- Write it down, show it.

Theory- Conclusions drawn become theory.(sometimes called fact)

This is a very simplified explanation. The point is that one cannot claim something as a scientific fact without taking steps to prove and disprove the hypothesis.

So You Think Evolution is Scientific Fact?

Scientific Method overview

Credit: Unknown

Copyright: sciencebuddies.org

Takeaways
  • Is evolution a scientific fact?
  • Alternative to teaching evolution or creationism
Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 5 of 5
 
 
Regarding dog breeding, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071024083652.htm

Posted on 04/17/2008 at 3:04:54 PM

 
(continued) A hundred-ish years ago, before Einstein's Special Relativity superseded it, the Newtonian Laws of Motion were the only "truth" regarding inertial reference frames. Thus, I understand that you are hesitant to teach children that evolution is "truth". But by the same token, evolution is just as much truth, or just not as much truth, as anything else in science - true as far as we know, but eligible to be overturned if new evidence proves otherwise. Until and unless you possess that new evidence, your duty as an educator is to teach evolution to children with the same certainty that you'd teach any other science topic.

Posted on 04/17/2008 at 3:04:27 PM

 
(continued) 3) Evolution can and will be treated as fact until science exists that proves it to be false. The problem is that virtually everyone who does try to prove it false appears to be doing so for religious/spiritual/philosophical reasons, and not scientific reasons. You can only disprove science with science, and not with philosophies that are thinly disguised as science (i.e. "Intelligent Design").

Posted on 04/17/2008 at 3:04:12 PM

 
(continued) 2) Even though humans are short-lived in a geological sense, we are able to observe evolution happen within our lifetimes. People selectively breed animals and plants for specific traits; anyone who has done serious dog breeding can tell you that it only takes a few generations of breeding tall-with-tall or short-with-short or aggressive-with-aggressive to begin to strengthen and enforce the desired trait in subsequent litters. Antibiotics have been in widespread use by mankind for less than a hundred years, and yet many forms of bacteria have already evolved, in response, so as to be immune to those antibiotics. Why do you deny the role that natural selection, via environmental influences, can play on a species over the course of millions of years? 3) Evolution can and will be treated as fact until science exists that proves it to be false. The problem is that virtually everyone who does try to prove it false appears to be doing so for religious/spiritual/philosophic

Posted on 04/17/2008 at 3:04:19 PM

 
There is certainly a lot that isn't known about evolution. Many of the particulars are still being studied, debated, and explored. However, in terms of the big picture, evolution is treated as fact by the scientific community at large. Yes, by strict definition it is only a "theory", but so is Einstein's "Theory" of Relativity - even though it's been proven to work absolutely everywhere it has been tested, on both a microscopic and macroscopic scale. So why is evolution treated as fact, even though it's only a theory? 1) There is a preponderance of evidence that the higher life forms currently on earth evolved from simpler life forms. Hundreds of thousands of analyzed fossils show the progression of life from simpler structures to more complex structures, and scientifically-accepted dating methods place these various life forms, relative to one another along a timeline, pretty much where one would expect if evolution were true. 2) Even though humans are short-lived in a geolog

Posted on 04/17/2008 at 3:04:40 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 5 of 5
 
Most Commented On