Quote:
Originally Posted by pj67coll
Part of the problem is a complete missapprehension amongst the lay public as to what the term "theory" means in the context of scientific knowledge. It's not at all the same meaning as "theoretically, or "in theory" etc as used by lay folk. Thus the continuing ignorance of the religious assuming they know what they are talking about and giving equal weight to ancient mumbo jumbo and psychological factors compared to the scientific process.
- Peter.
|
Correct most people only have a high school science education which is poor at best, so its hard for them to grasp it. Most have never done any actual lab work, etc.
They see the word "theory" and use it in there lay context which is incorrect.
In a way its a lot like the frog in the well, since we only know so much science can't explain it all yet, so as in the past people fill it in with religion. Like ancient cave men who thought thunder and lightening were gods or something.
The problem is when science catch's up and disproves it, that causes problems. Its like if you proved Zues didn't exist to the Greeks by explaining lightening, same thing now when you tell the Christians the world isn't 2k years old or whatever they believe.