re: Why are theories on evolution, climate change, etc sacrosanct,

quote:

---

That's true and an earlier poster noted the difference between the scientific definition of "theory" and the lay definition of "theory"

---

Yes. I understand that once something moves from hypothesis into scientific theory they have observational basis to lay of foundation of certainty. However, it would not be the first time a theory was proven to be inaccurate. just because it is a scientific theory does not make it indisputable.

quote:

---

Just like Gravity is also a scientific theory.

---

At one point, Gravity was considered to be a law. (I honestly had no idea it had moved from law to theory, though. Just shows that i am an old man and have not followed things as closely as perhaps i should...I DO realize, though, when my wife drops a dish, it falls and breaks and I have to go out and buy a new one! )

quote:

---

But at this point when looking at all of the evidence evolution via natural selection is the most likely explanation.

---

I understand this, too...I was only trying to point out that this question was far from final.

quote:

---

I consider myself a man of science and I do not believe in evolution, I merely accept that it is the most likely outcome based on the evidence that is out there.

---

I also agree. As I said earlier in the thread....everything people are pointing t as fact is based on information they have right now. In 400 years they (Scientists and academia in general) will be shaking their heads and laughing at how backward and naive we are today.

Evolution is a bit of a hot button issue for people. I remember when schools taught the evolutionary chart. (There was actually one hung up in one of my science classrooms when i was a kid. It was made up of observable "facts" and it only took a few years to discover it was full of holes....but that is another topic.