startribune.com
Many use 'theory' incorrectly in evolution debate, and that's a fact
Editor's Corner Sam Barnes
December 21, 2005
(snip)
But when a scientist refers to a "theory," he is a lot more certain about its validity. In science, the New World Dictionary says, the word "theory" implies considerable evidence in support of a formulated general principle." The dictionary specifically mentions the "theory of evolution" as an example of such a body of "considerable evidence."
(snip)
Some people, in discussing the teaching of evolution vs. intelligent design, will refer to both concepts as "theories." But most scientists would tell us they could not be much more different.
They make this distinction:
• The scientific "theory" of evolution is based on a large body of scientific fact developed from a wide range of observations and experiments.
• Intelligent design, on the other hand, is a "theory" only in the colloquial sense; most scientists consider it "mere speculation."
(snip)
In a telephone interview, Boehland told us, "There is a huge difference between a scientific 'theory' and just a flippant, 'Well, it's my "theory" that...' " Yet Boehland said he has seen cases where supporters of intelligent design seem to have fostered a misunderstanding over the use of the word "theory" to foment public doubts about evolution. "In some cases, I think it's done intentionally," by introducing the notion that, " 'Well, both are theories, and we've all got our theories...' "
(snip)
Contact the writer at 612-673-7840 or at sbarnes@startribune.com.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/106/5789452.html