This “just a theory” misconception comes up all the time. There’s a difference between a scientific theory and a theory in the colloquial sense people use it in conversations. A scientific theory is more than just an idea or a hypotheses. It’s a model that has stood up to repeated testing and falsification. It’s the pinnacle of science and as close to fact as you’re going to get. The simple difference between a law and a theory is that a law is the description (usually mathematical) and the theory is the explanation of why the law works. A theory can be made up of many laws. For example Newton's Law of Gravity is a mathematical description of how objects behave when effected by gravity. But it has no explanation for what gravity actually is. Einstein’s theory of relativity on the other hand does provide an explanation for what gravity is. That’s why it’s a theory. http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/culture-miscellaneous/difference-between-theory-and-law/ [quote]Law: According to science, a law is a generalized statement set after a number of observations. A law has no explanations or exceptions when it is framed. It is an obvious fact recorded after observations. A good example of this may be the force of gravity. It is observed that an apple falls down on the surface of the Earth. It is an undeniable fact. This observation has no exceptions also. No one has ever observed a reverse or alternative phenomenon. Hence it is considered to be a law. There is another misconception about the hierarchical level of law. A group of scientists is of the idea that there is a hierarchy of hypothesis, theory, and law, but this is only an erroneous statement. Laws are obvious and simple statements. Theory: A theory is the explanation of the observational data set forward in the form of a law. In simple words, a theory is the reasoning behind a law. It may also be put as an advanced or evolved hypothesis. “Hypothesis” is a probable reason behind any observation. A hypothesis has to undergo various tests. If the hypothesis holds well in different conditions, it may be accepted as a theory.[/quote]

... So yeah, evolution is not set in stone, it is a theory, I understand the work that that takes to become such, but it is not a law, therefore not fact... [spoiler]not included in the DLC[/spoiler]

[quote]... So yeah, evolution is not set in stone, it is a theory, I understand the work that that takes to become such, but it is not a law, therefore not fact... [/quote] Seriously? It’s like you didn’t read a single word of my comment. I’m not going to waste my time explaining the difference between a law and a theory again... or why a scientific theory is as close to fact as you’re ever going to get. You want to be ignorant go right ahead. I guess you don’t bother going to the doctor or the hospital either because germ theory is “just a theory” right?

... I read the whole thing, and actually a scientific law is closer to being fact than a scientific theory, and it still maintaining it's status as a theory and not becoming a law still shows we don't know enough about it for it to become a fact... [spoiler]not included in the DLC[/spoiler]

You may of read it but you obviously didn’t understand it. So against my better judgment I’ll try again. Laws are the descriptions of something in nature. Theories are the explanations of why those descriptions work - well established explanations that have an overwhelming amount of evidence to support them. For example Heliocentrism is the theory that the planets orbit the sun. Kepler's laws of planetary motion are the mathematical formulas used to calculate those orbits. One is just mathematical rules. The other is the overarching explanatory theory that makes use of those rules (and others). Kepler’s laws don’t prove the earth orbits the sun. They are just mathematical formulas. The theory of Heliocentrism has been proven though - by repeated independent observation. So what you’re essentially saying is that you don’t believe the earth orbits the sun because it’s “just a theory”.

... But the theory of evolution doesn't have an overwhelming amount of evidence, so why it is even considered a theory is beyond me, but even theories with supposed overwhelming amounts of evidence have been overturned and proven to be false, so that's why they never became a scientific law... [spoiler]not included in the DLC[/spoiler]

[quote]... But the theory of evolution doesn't have an overwhelming amount of evidence, so why it is even considered a theory is beyond me, but even theories with supposed overwhelming amounts of evidence have been overturned and proven to be false, so that's why they never became a scientific law... [/quote] Oh Jesus Christ. Do I really have to explain this for the third time? Theories and laws are separate things. Theories don’t become laws when they get enough evidence. Theories will always be theories and laws will always be laws. Please read my explanation again more slowly this time. As for your assertion that there isn’t an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting the theory of evolution - that’s just plain wrong. Just because you’re unaware of the evidence doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. There have been literally millions of fossils found. There’s also comparative embryology, there’s genetic evidence, theirs comparative anatomy - the list goes on. All independent lines of evidence pointing to the same thing - evolution happens. The video above is a very simple and easy to understand introduction to how scientists know that evolution is true. Also here’s a link to a much more detailed breakdown of the evidence: http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html The theory of evolution - whether you want to believe it or not - is one of the most established and well evidenced theories in science.

You’re serious..? Or trying to be ironic?

Do you understand what theory means in a scientific context? Because judging by your post, I'm guessing you don't.

... Yes, I actually do, I think it may be you who doesn't know what it means in a scientific context, due to your post claiming its a fact, which a theory is not... [spoiler]not included in the DLC[/spoiler]

A theory is as close as any hypothesis can get to fact. It has been tested through empirical evidence, it is extremely well substantiated and is accepted at this point.

So what about Alex Jones's conspiracy theories?