I’m fully aware of the definition of scientific theory, although, I don’t necessarily agree with the across-the-board significance of it when applied to different topics. Plate tectonics, gravity and atomics are in current, observable effect and not nearly as widely disputed as evolution.
Just because the term, when applied to the former 3 topics are significantly more accepted, that doesn’t mean the latter has as much evidence to give equal credibility. The analogy of a warranty applies: They’re all the same in definition, but not extent.
I strongly believe in the former 3 theories, however, I don’t know them as fact and when disputed, would not attempt to pass them off as such. The problem is finding someone to dispute them.
I can’t provide a unit of measure of a theory’s quality, but whatever it is, the Theory of Evolution, clearly, is not as strong as gravity and it certainly isn’t the “fact” or certainty many portray it to be. I have no problem with any faith…but it ain’t no fact.
Don't be fooled. Real, legitimate, scientists, in the fields appropriate for considerations of biological concepts, are (for all practical purposes) in unison in accepting the reality of evolution.
