Originally Posted by sireal

You know, if another theory cropped up, which slowly gained more and more evidence, more so than evolution, and explained the effects/evidence logically, everyone would change to that theory, no?

I think it's a little presumptuous to say that it does most definitely exist, when anything and everything in science isn't certain, by that I mean if an alternate theory disproved another more known theory with more evidence for it, then the alternate theory would become 'fact'.

Originally Posted by Dalliance

Except evolution is not a theory. Centuries of observation and study has proven beyond all doubt that the process happens. Now, there are various theories within the area, like whether all life on Earth has a common ancestor or if there are multiple, but evolution itself is not.

Originally Posted by ImmortalCow

Obviously.

But since no such competing theory exists, and there is overwhelming evidence and reviews in favor of evolution, it is at this moment a scientific fact.

Seems like a pointless theoretical situation to discuss; "if evolution didn't exist then some other theory would exist"... It's obvious...

Originally Posted by sireal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

First off, you're both using the wrong definition of theory.

Secondly, there are no 'scientific facts', especially in other fluctuating areas of science.

Originally Posted by sireal

You know, if another theory cropped up, which slowly gained more and more evidence, more so than evolution, and explained the effects/evidence logically, everyone would change to that theory, no?

I think it's a little presumptuous to say that it does most definitely exist, when anything and everything in science isn't certain, by that I mean if an alternate theory disproved another more known theory with more evidence for it, then the alternate theory would become 'fact'.