Atheists, isn't it arrogant to say that the theory of evolution is a fact?

Question

It's an atheistic opinion, as it is a religious opinion that creationism is true.

Answer 1

Scientific theories are never really considered to BE facts, but when they are supported by as much factual evidence as the theory of evolution they can be considered to be as good as facts.

Evolution IS a fact (it happens), HOW it happens is explained by the 'theory of evolution', which may not be completely correct, but the supporting evidence shows that it isn't far off.





@'ROBERT P' : You will find several different definitions of the word 'theory' in any good dictionary, and to know which one applies you need to consider the context in which the word has been used. In science 'theory' does NOT have the meaning you try and attach - look at the OTHER definitions.



@'▫' : "it would be a scientific Law if it was a fact"

Scientific theories, and scientific laws are two very different things. The theories do not become laws, in fact they can be considered to be ABOVE law because they explain 'how' things happen (laws simply state 'what' happens).



@'Tigger' : Yes there are different definitions of the word evolution, however most are not describing biological evolution (and your suggestion that the theory of evolution expects an animals offspring to be anything other than a variation of the parents is a blatant straw man.

Answer 2

Who said it's a fact? It's a theory. That's why it's called the theory of evolution. But do you know what else is a scientific theory? Gravity. We can be pretty dang sure in the validity of theories, and still consider it a small possibility that they might not be true. But given the overwhelming evidence supporting evolution, we teach it because it's the best theory we have explaining how we got to where we are today.



And evolution is not related to atheism at all. Seriously, did you just use that logic? Because religious people believe in Creationism, atheists must believe in evolution? There are so many things completely screwed up with that reasoning. First of all, Creationism is not the religious opinion. It's the Creationist opinion. There are other religions besides Creationism, ya know, that may have completely differing opinions from this. Second, Creationism and evolution are not the only two answers. If they were, and atheists and Creationists have differing opinions, then that would mean that atheists must believe in evolution. But you're using a false dilemma here. There are many many other beliefs that are in play here. And finally, atheists do not share common beliefs. We share a common lack in a certain belief. But in terms of our opinions and morals, we don't have to have anything in common. You could believe that aliens started life on Earth and influenced the development of species, and still be an atheist. This is an extreme generalization.



So there ya go. A couple generalizations, and a false dilemma, all in the same claim. Sorry, debate isn't your expertise.

Answer 3

Defintion is always a problem in this 'chat room'.



I will try to bring a few things together for you, including some of the answers you have been given.



First, in all sciences the word 'theory' does not mean 'idea' or 'guess', it is effectively a 'folder' where you will find everything about that subject. So 'The Theory of Motion', a theory that began life with Isaac Newton, is where you will find the 'laws of motion', facts about gravity, and some of the information that is also part of the Theory of General Relativity that was founded by Einstein, it will also contain all the research, failed, proven, or otherwise that relates to the motion of objects.



So, the 'Theory of Evolution', will contain all that we know to be true about how life developes, all the information on genetics, all the information on DNA, including chemical structure, physical properties, and how DNA interacts with other compounds. The theory will also contain all the research that has been done over the last 150 years since Darwin, and those things that were 'known' before that time, including failed ideas.



The reason theories do not in themselves ever become 'laws' is two fold, one laws are actually part of theory, and secondly new research and information can be added at anytime, this does not detract from the facts that are already known and proved.



The reality here is that people use the word theory in every day life to mean something that it doesn't, they use it as a clever sounding alternative for the word idea, and that is wrong.



A further point, 'atheists' do not 'believe' is facts, by definition, an atheist is not any different from a theist, a theist believes in a god, deity, or formal religion, an atheist is simply someone that does NOT believe in those things, no 'facts' are required for either position.



What you need to remember is that not all atheists are scientists, and not all scientists are atheists.



You will find that there are scientists, not many and probably very, very few in physics, cosmology, or astronomy, that 'beleive in a god or deity, and there are many people who are religious who accept the facts of science, and are therefore not 'creationists', there is not a one thing or another choice here, it is simply that the debate has become polarised because the loudest voices are the creationists, as their very existence depoends on them trying to cast doubt of what science has already proven as fact.



To sum up, evolution has proven facts behind it, genetics for a start, so whether or not people chose to beleive it, it happens, much in the same way that back in the past (1600's) the Pope at the time wanted to 'believe' the Sun went around the Earth made no difference to the fact that the opposite proposed by Galileo was true.

Answer 4

I'm not an atheist. But it's not at all arrogant to say that the theory of evolution is solidly proven to be true.



I avoid the word 'fact" because evolution is a conclusion, derived by reasoning from facts. Facts are the observations on which we base such conclusions. But it's far from being merely an opinion, because there's a wealth of evidence to prove it.



Creationism, on the other hand, is not only an opinion, it's a "religious" opinion only in the sense that it asserts that the world around us is entirely deceptive. If evolution is not true, then the entire array of life on this planet was explicitly designed primarily for the purpose of convincing us that evolution IS true. Because all that evidence could not have happened by chance.



So creationism asserts either that its God is the Father of Lies (which appears to me to be a form of Satanism), or that we were not created by God (which is definitely a form of Gnosticism).

Answer 5

See, here's where the difference lies: 100% of the available physical evidence supports evolution. How can you claim that both are just opinions and equally valid when one side has all the facts? That's like saying the spherical earth theory and the flat earth theory are both opinions and it's wrong to say that a round earth is a fact just because all the evidence supports it.



I've noticed that creationists intentionally mislead people about the scientific definitions of "theory," "law" and "fact." Why would they have to do that if their case was so airtight?

Answer 6

Evolution is part of the science of biology. Scientific theory is based on observation and experimentation, and is tested to a high standard. It's the nearest we can get to the truth about how nature and the universe work, and even that can eventually be shown to be wrong or require adjustment.



I realised in mid-teenage (over 45 years ago) that faith was based upon nothing but itself, that science explained nature satisfactorily without needing supernatural beings, and that religious beliefs were no different to those of ancient beliefs in gods and goddesses. I've found the humility to admit that I don't know everything, rather than masking this by invoking a deity.



It certainly isn't arrogant not to believe that everything was made for my benefit by a supreme being in whose image I was made.

Answer 7

Evolution is a fact.

The current and any future theory of evolution explains why the facts exist by providing a mechanism by which the facts can relate to each other in a meaningful and predictive framework, accounting for all the data and being refuted by none.

Answer 8

No, it would be misleading to call the theory of evolution a fact.



Evolution is an observable biological process. This is a fact.



The theory of evolution is a scientific model that seeks to explain the observable process of evolution.



Consider evolution to be a thing, and the theory of evolution to be a book about it. That's considerably more accurate than what you're suggesting.

Answer 9

It is a fact that organisms are unique because their individual genomes are unique.



It is a fact that some organisms are better suited to survival than others. The survivors pass on their advantage to their offspring, who are therefore also more likely to survive.



Over generations, a successful trait spreads through a population.



This is evolution by natural selection. Evolution is a fact. It has been observed.

Answer 10

the Theory of evolution is the MOST Factually supported Scientific Theory of all time. Supported bt Valid Testable evidence!



It is also supported by several other branches of Science



Creationism can NOT be supported by any Valid Testable evidence

and Evolution is an OBSERVED Phenomena!



It IS a Fact...

Answer 11

How does pointing out something is a fact reveal an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities? Believing you are important enough to have a special relationship with an almighty universe creator fits the definition of arrogance rather better.

Answer 12

According to the dictionary, a theory is an idea or opinion. But then they will say the theory of evolution is a fact. And they call theists arrogant.

Answer 13

The theory of evolution is no more an opinion than the theory of gravity is an opinion.

Answer 14

"It's an atheistic opinion"



Errrr, nope. It is scientific opinion backed up by reams and reams of verifiable research.



Just so you don't continue making the same ridiculous statements.

Atheist = one who does not believe in a god or gods. End off. Nothing to do with science whatsoever.

Answer 15

We have enough evidence supporting the model to treat it as a fact for all practical purposes



It is going to be endlessly subject to refinement and adjustment, lets just say we can say for definite we didn't poof into existence a few thousand years ago

Answer 16

Evolution IS a fact. If Evolution was impossible after humans were "brought into their current form", white people wouldn't exist. We would all be African/African-American.

Answer 17

It's a bait - switch tactic.. Evolution is a ambigious word.. In the dictionary you will find about 5 or 6 defintions... NO matter what defintion you are challenging, they argue another defintion - if you challenge it they accuse you of not knowing what you are taking about and can fall back on one of the definitions. This is why people need to completely dump the word evolution and be specific in their use of language.



IF sombody asserts 'evolution is a fact' then agree with them, Yes, trees lose thier leaves in the fall and grow them back in the summer. (that is one defintion of evoluton - change, or cyclic changes) So what?



Force them to define what they mean by evolution, if they mean Common Descent then you are in a postion to point out a fact is something that is observable and reproducible and ask them to give you an observed example of a creature producing viable offspring that was not just a variation of itself or that was a member of a different genus or above in the taxonomic tree. If they can't then it has not been observed and cannot be called a fact. Just that simple!

Answer 18

No, it's a scientific theory, based on substantial evidence we can prove.

Not a fact, not an opinion.



Faith is Faith. Do you really need "proof" for what you know to be true?

Answer 19

I don't say anything about evolution. I'm not a biologist.

Answer 20

Let's clarify the issue here. Evolution factually exists as a theory. It has absolutely no bearing on what can be observed in reality, however.

Answer 21

it would be a scientific Law if it was a fact