Evolutionary Tree original

© John Joyce at spindriftpress.com.

Headline: 

B.C. Conservative MP James Lunney tweets against evolution

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/b-c-conservative-mp-james-lunney-tweets-against-evolution-1.2978984

Every few years Creationism takes some swings at Evolution and what I can only describe as utter silliness breaks out. The last big flare up came a year, culminating in debate between Ken Ham (a Creationist) and Bill Nye The Science Guy. I’ll link their debate below, but after that debate was watched by the world, streamed live on YouTube, things calmed a bit. Yeah, there was this woman at the Field Museum in Chicago, but the weakness of her arguments meant she wasn’t in too much danger of being taken seriously. (Note: I’ve been to the Field Museum, you can actually see the scientists at work there and I’m sure they’d have happily addressed her concerns if she’d asked them.)
Then I read the headline above and have to shake my head in disgust (again).

It drives me nuts that people use syntax semantics to attack legitimate knowledge. A scientific theory is an entirely different thing from just a regular theory. Many words have multiple definitions and meanings, and theory is one such word.

 
theory (science): a coherent group of tested general propositions,commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena. (The Theory of Evolution, Theory of Relativity…)
 

theory (general): a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. (“I have a theory about who committed the crime”)

(From Dictionary.com)

 

The Theory of Evolution is not a guess or science’s best shot in the dark because they don’t have much to go on, it’s the result of studying our world, building a foundation of knowledge in multiple fields (biology, physics, mathematics, aercheology etc.) and continually challenging what we know with new evidence in order to refine it. It is based on direct evidence, observation and empirical data. More importantly, science has no agenda except verifiable facts and expanding its knowledge. It wants to be tested. It needs to be tested. And science can be tested, by anyone, at any time.

The Ham/Nye Debate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kgvhG3AkI