Science in part had two parts fact/theory .
What you try to do is giving theory a degree of fact.
to become like this :
"The fact of evolution" instead of "theory of evolution".
that clear fraud and playing with meaning.
Again, you don't understand what you are talking about, Godobeyer.
Perhaps, if you had bother to actually listen to science teacher, you would know that SCIENTIFIC THEORY is a set of statements that explains an observed phenomena, whether this phenomena be natural or man-made.
The phenomena is the fact that scientist would try to explain.
But the only ways to verify if the explanation or theory are TRUE is through REPEATED TESTS or through EMPIRICAL EVIDENCES.
The tests and evidences are the most objective method of...
(A) ...REFUTE the theory, hence the theory is FALSE & should be DISCARDED.
(B) ...VERIFY & VALIDATE the theory.
Although logic and maths are important in science, they are not as important than EVIDENCES or TESTS.
Theory is not just guesses and speculation. The power of the well-tested theory come from...
- the explanation,
- the prediction & from the probability,
- and last but not least, from the measurable observations (eg tests and evidences).
Do you know why scientist has to test their hypothesis and theory, rigorously and repeatedly, over as many times as they can?
So what he or she is explaining, is not based on belief or faith. If it was based on belief and faith, then the explanation is biased. There are other reasons to test his theory, like to make sure that any errors are minimal.
But a scientist don't test his hypothesis or theory alone. That's what the peer review are for: for independent scientists in the same or related fields to his papers.
I don't expect you to understand or agree me, because I think I have already wasted my time on you, because you have already entrenched in your biased ignorance. You think everyone but you are wrong. Others have tried to explain to you where you are wrong, but you are too prideful and unwilling to learn the truth.
