Scientific theory. a coherent group of propositions formulated to explain a group of facts or phenomena in the natural world and repeatedly confirmed through experiment or observation: Evolution. The process by which different kinds of living organism are believed to have developed from earlier forms during the history of the earth. I am not particularly scientifically minded, and in particular biology was my least favourite subject. I have looked for the alternative scientific theories of evolution as defined above and can find none. So I am interested to know if they are any? Happy to listen to suggestions god did it, but would remind you that you need to explain how god did it, and show this god exists. After all all scientific theories need to be attributed to an author.
Who did tell you it is a description of scientific theory? Who is the author? Some kind of a god or a group of gods? Now let us see, does it describe: Newton’s mechanics, Newton’s theory of universal attraction, Dynamic theory of heat (thermodynamics) Electromagnetic theory, Dynamic of liquids and gases, Nuclear theory, Theory of relativity, and any other useful and working theory or any invention we use, or it does not and there is a better and more accurate description? And if there is who is the author?
Sorry I do apologise for not quoting the source. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/scientific-theory and https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/evolution
As Evolution has not been debunked or even challenged in scientific circles, no competing theory exists.
There are no scientific theories that are in opposition to evolution. There are a lot of pseudoscientific theories in opposition to evolution.
No, just a lot of closed minded people. Remember that primitive people interpret what they see according to their standard, so if Aliens showed up, they would seem like gods to them, hence an entire culture based on ancient legends once based on facts.
So nobody has a competing Scientific Theory to show us? Evolution is the only theory that should be taught in a science class then?
Did you actually think there was one? Or was this just a set up? lol It is accepted within science today that life evolves. There are still huge gaps in knowledge, and as long as evolutionary biology is based upon philosophical materialism and unless new discoveries are made which points away from materialism as the sole explanation I do not expect this to change. Of course no one is looking away from materialism, so that would have to change in order to open up new possibilities. In fact, it is probably impossible in academia today to even consider looking past materialism. That is how entrenched materialism is. Yet it is certainly within the realm of possibility that evolution contains both materialistic processes and something beyond such processes. But science as it stands now, insists on purity, and that purity involves only materialistic processes. Were you hoping to get the religious inclined to present something? lol
I think scientists argue over the finer details of evolution, past and present, seeing as how the preponderance of evidence renders evolution as a general theory undisputable at this point. It is a current and on-going process, and a basic property of life as we know it, which humanity has also long been exploiting to shape domesticated varieties of animals and plants. Branches of science outside of biology also tie into it, such as geology, seeing as how the history of earth itself and the life on it are very much intertwined. Deniers of evolution do not even understand what it is they are denying. They're generally clueless about the facts supporting it, probably because they purposely ignore such information in favor of what their favorite creationists and preachers are telling them.
Science requires hard evidence. When the well water made people sick they used to say it was due to evil spirits. Science showed us that bacteria make you sick, not evil spirits. You would still have people howling at the moon to cure illness.
