theories

Home

Chat

Blogs

Collection

Directory

Home : 2004 : November : 15

theories
By Mary

The thing is, by the time something earns the title "theory" in science, the evidence supporting it is very strong indeed, and the evidence supporting evolution is overwhelming. It's in the fossil record, and the best way
to see evolution today, right before your eyes, is to study microbiology. The reason we can't cure the common cold is because the cold virus(es) mutate, or EVOLVE very, very quickly. They adapt to their environment. The viruses that adapt survive, those that don't, perish. That's all evolution is. But you're getting confused between a hypothesis and a theory. If evolution were a

hypothesis, then yes, teaching that as fact would be questionable. But evolution is a THEORY. A theory is something for which the supporting evidence is very, very substantial. Gravity is also a theory, but nobody minds that gravity is taught as fact. Atomic theory (you know, the Periodic Chart of the Elements) is exactly that--Atomic THEORY. Do you also doubt the existence of protons and neutrons? Do you dispute that putting hydrogen and oxygen together, in the right proportions, constitutes water (H2O)? It's a theory, too. And it's gained that status because there is so much evidence supporting it that it would take something earth-shattering indeed to change our thinking about it. Do you also doubt the existence of the dinosaurs?

What I don't understand is what is so objectionable about evolution. What would it mean to admit that evolution is true? Would it mean that you no longer feel that you have a soul? Would it make some huge difference in your day-to-day existence? I really don't get what is so off-putting about it.

And--nobody is saying that God isn't the force behind evolution. I don't know, maybe there is a God behind it, but if there is, then evolution is definitely the way that God does business. And I mean, good grief: What do you want for a miracle, anyway?