I thought I was, until I saw a "modern" definition of scientific theory.Quote from Gabfly1:
Are you cognizant of the difference between legitimate scientific theory and mere speculation or wishful thinking?
I'm glad you noticed, and I try to be the same way. Which is in part why sometimes I have a problem swallowing the latest scientific theory as fact until proven wrong.I'm glad you characterize legitimate scientists as those people who don't care where the evidence leads them, as long as they arrive at the truth.
Until it's proven indisputable fact with no caveats I'll consider it just a theory. Just for the record I think evolution to some extent/up to a point at least is a fact. I just have a hard time swallowing the whole life from inert space dust which itself supposedly suddenly appeared from nothingness theory.That's why they try to invalidate their hypotheses with rigorous testing. Despite such efforts, the scientific theory of evolution has yet to be disproven.
Now you're just presuming anyone with questions about evolution, as it's currently preached, is automatically a creationist. Again just for the record; I don't pretend to know if there is/was a creator or not. Although I don't see that possibility as any less far fetched than the big bang/evolution theory. I think both should be presented in the classroom for what they are (unproven theory and belief/faith) and let the students decide for themselves.On the other hand, ALL creationists already have an end in mind:
I see that you have not yet muddled your way out of false equivalency, and have not yet fully comprehended what constitutes a bona fide scientific theory and how it contrasts with mere belief or untested hypothesis. By scientific standards, evolution is for all intents and purposes a matter of fact. These are the standards that have brought science and human understanding to where it is today. That is not my conclusion. It is the conclusion of all objective (non-creationist) scientists.Quote from Lucrum:
...Again just for the record; I don't pretend to know if there is/was a creator or not. Although I don't see that possibility as any less far fetched than the big bang/evolution theory. I think both should be presented in the classroom for what they are (unproven theory and belief/faith) and let the students decide for themselves.