Stripe finally remembers something Barbarian taught him:
The problem is that the word "theory" means something very different in lay language than it does in science:
Yes. A theory is an idea or group of ideas, repeatedly verified by evidence.
But then he gets it wrong:
A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is justifiably asserted because of experiments.
No. Evidence. Newton did no experiments on gravity. He observed the motion of the moon, and used that evidence to formulate his theory. Experiments are just one way to get evidence.
What Stripe forgets is that it's a
hypothesis that must be testable; theories are always, in principle falsifiable precisely because they depend on falsible hypotheses.
As Stripe learned, scientists point out that a scientific theory is never considered to be proven; it's always provisional on new information. Macroevolution (evolution of new taxa) is a fact, because it's directly observed. Evolutionary theory will never be a fact, since it explains the phenomenon, and is only provisionally true.
This is where Stripe gets into trouble. He cannot get his head around the distinction between evolution (the observed phenomenon), natural selection and mutation (agencies of evolution), and things like universal common descent(consequences of evolution). Hence his continuing difficulties.
Creationists want none of that when it comes to their religion, so they conflate evolution with natural selection with common descent.
When challenged, they assert that scientists don't know what a theory is as if it were not them who committed the most egregious of scientific failings; obfuscation of the difference between these three things.
The other error — actually the same (perhaps unintentional) error — is they confuse phenomenon with theory. Gravity and evolution are observed facts. There are theories that explain each. In each case, the discoverer's theory remains in place, but over time, we've found some of their conclusions are not correct.
Newton assumed that time and mass are constant with regard to velocity. Which is a reasonable approximation at velocities and masses we normally encounter. But it's not strictly true, and while NASA uses Newton's theory of Gravitation to navigate probes about the solar system, they do have to sometimes consider relativistic effects.
Likewise, while Darwin's four points remain as solid as ever, he assumed the scientific thought of his time with regard to inheritance. So today, evolution is defined as a change in allele frequency in a population over time, rather than "descent with modification." Ironically, this discovery cleared up a really difficult objection to Darwin's theory. If inheritance is like mixing paint (as everyone assumed in his time), then it's hard to see how a new variation could persist; it would be gone like a drop of red paint in a barrel of white paint. On the other hand,if it's like sorting beads (and that is what Mendel discovered) then Darwinian theory makes complete sense.
However, the phenomena of gravity and evolution remain facts.
Stripe's other problem is his belief in "just a theory." Theory is a strong as it goes in science. People unfamiliar with science generally think a law is stronger. But it isn't. Lacking explanitory power, it's weaker.
Until he get this right, he will never be part of a sensible discussion.
Those who assume the truth of their ideas aren't practicing science, they're asserting their religion.
One should keep those things in mind and thereby won't embarrass one's self when talking to someone who knows science.
