Rod Hagen (
Sun, 05 Feb 1995 11:26:45 +1000

In article <3g6ps4$>, (RFHjr) wrote:

> As I was taught, to use the methods of science correctly you should
> only form an opinion after evidence is found of a conclusive nature.
> This would be called fact. Evidence which can't be proven conclusively but
> has no apparent contradiction would be called Theory. At best Evolution is
> a theory, and special creation something less than that. Anyone from
> either camp who will claim to know the truth is certainly less than a
> scientist.

On the contrary, most people involved with science seem to accept Popper's
view that you can never *prove* something conclusively, only disprove the
alternatives! The best we can do is your level of "theory". Looked at
from this perspective, evolution theory ranks up pretty high in the
evidentiary stakes!

Rod Hagen