Like the part where the OP admitted to “chumming the waters” in order to provoke a planned reaction from the “faithful”, while adding virtually none of his own words to the debate and deliberately engaging in such obvious behavior as inventing his own definition for the word “theory”?
We can hash this out amongst ourselves, I see no reason to play the OP’s game now that he’s come right out with it.
Which, admittedly, has a liberal and secular bias.
No, because people aren’t “accepting theory” when it comes to evolution. There’s a massive amount of evidence for it, as opposed to none whatsoever for creationism. Evolution isn’t a theory; it’s fact. Like gravity, the theory is about the details of how it works, not about whether it exists or not.
No, evolution is a theory. I guess you’re not really clear on what the word theory means.
No, it’s both a theory and a fact. At any rate, theory refers to the scientific definition, not the common one.
You are wrong. Evolution is as much a fact as gravity. There are numerous theories of evolutionary mechanics, cladogenesis, etc… But that allelic frequencies can shift within populations is totally beyond question or doubt. Evolution is a fact.
There’s a word for this.
This is what I mean about creationists not even knowing the definitions of the words involved. Take some time an find out what the word “theory” means in science. Here’s a hint: it doesn’t mean “unproven.”
There’s a term for this.
ETA - great minds think alike.
ETA2 - and he misspelled ‘faithful’. I felt compelled to mention that.
By the way, what planet are you posting from? Because while it’s possible not to understand the arguments for evolution, if you skipped elementary school, for you to claim that science hasn’t even presented metric tons of solid evidence in support of it requires you to have not been present on the planet earth during the past hundred and fifty years.
Or I suppose you could have been in some small, third world country, isolated from books, computers, and the internet. Are you isolated from the internet?
So you agree with me. Good.
That’s trolling, then. This is a formal warning to stop it immediately. Don’t start threads just to annoy people or you will end up banned.
A question: say someone granted you that some mystical power zapped the first cell into existence through magic. Would you accept that all life now on earth evolved from that first cell?
Are you sure you want me on your side? 
Evolution is an observed, and demonstrable natural phenomenon – the frequency of alleles changes within biological populations. This is not disputable. The “theory” is the explanation for why, most notably natural selection acting as a sorting mechanism for favorable mutations, leading to adaptation and speciation. This theory (i.e explanation) is proven beyond any semblence of a reasonable doubt, but no amount of proof can make a theory not be a theory.
Der Trihs said it’s not a theory, which is incorrect. Talk to him about using the term wrong, not me. I never said it wasn’t a fact, merely that it IS a theory.
If it was trolling, I don’t know that it succeeded. The pro-science response looks fairly calm and well-reasoned to me.
Almost weary, in fact.
If you read his whole post, he made a distinction between the “fact” that evolution is an observed natural phenomenon, and the “theory” as an explanation for how it works.
mswas was just nitpicking, not putting forth a position for debate. I do this myself, though I shouldn’t (see my spelling note above).
Save further rebuttals for actual debates. Heh, like whether evidence for evolution can be observed to a convincing degree without specialized training or equipment. Stuff like that.
OK. let’s just agree that we all know what we’re talking about. I don’t think anyone is confused or misinformed except the OP.
The “Big Bang Theory”, is just that… theory. No, not disproven by scientifc rigor, just as the theory of creation has not been disproven. What was there before the Big Bang. How many Big Bangs have there been? The Universe is still expanding from the most recent Bang. Will it one day start to contract to the point that there will be another Bang? How did the first one come about?
With evolution, like the Big Bang, there are unexplainable gaps, and you can only go back so far until there are unanswerable questions
Hmm… there seems to be an aspect of religion to what science itself cannot “prove”.
Faith.
LOL ok.