Evolution on trial

An evocative post title.  A bit misleading perhaps.

This is my first post and I cannot start it with a boring title.

To get to a scientifically defendable opinion of the subject matter, we should discard all faith-based assumptions.  I cannot convince you of the existence of God by quoting from the Good Book.  So instead we discard all arguments of whether or not God exists, whether or not Evolution of Genesis may be true.  If we want to be truly scientific about it, we cannot entertain a preconceived idea of the answer before asking the question..

So how do we go about this?

After forgetting our preconceptions, we look at the evidence, and apply science and reason.  Science provides a tool to objectively question what we see around us.  The answers to those questions can be called results, and those results enable us to form a theory.  What exactly is a theory?  Wikipedia says:

 

A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, esp. one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained

We could say a theory is an idea we conceive to try and explain the facts as we have perceived them.  If I see a car going uphill at 60mph, I have proof that something is imparting energy to it, or else it would not move uphill according to natural laws.  I can further notice it has an exhaust pipe and fuel cap, and develop a theory that the car is powered by gasoline.

At what point does a theory graduate to scientific fact?

When enough clever people believe it to be true?

When it is the only answer we find acceptable?

No, the theory becomes fact when it is conclusively proven to be true.  When there exists no possibility whatsoever that it is false.  How do we prove a theory as true?  Typically, the theory can be tested by inventing a scientific experiment to verify some or other expected outcome of the theory. 

If our theory postulates the car is running on gas, we could open the filler cap and take a sample of the tank contents.  We analyze the sample, and it turns out to be gasoline.  What does this tell us? - it tells us there is gasoline in a hollow container in the back of the vehicle.  It does not necessarily prove the car requires gasoline to run..  But it does increase the probability that the theory may be true.  If we siphoned off the gasoline, and the car refuses to go, we have proved that it will not work unless there is gasoline in the tank.  We can then work it from another angle and put a known amount of gasoline in, verify the car is running, and then maybe measure the distance it will go before the gas runs out.  To be 100% sure we could fill the tank with water and verify the car does not work.  At this point, we could graduate the theory to fact and say the car does indeed run on gasoline.  (As opposed to I "believe" the car runs on gasoline)

In following posts I will briefly define the two opposing theories (creation vs evolution) as I see them (without commenting on the validity of either side)  Thereafter we can objectively look at some evidence..

Lets have some fun!

All comments will be published...  I will only be able to answer one or two questions at a time though..