Archive for Saturday, October 15, 2005

Science semantics

October 15, 2005

Advertisement

To the editor:

Yes, it is quite astounding that in 2005 we are still debating evolution versus creationism. However, let's place the blame squarely where it belongs - with the science community for employing sloppy, misleading semantics.

Why have scientists not come up with a better word than "theory" to describe evolution? To the layman, "theory" means ANY belief, however weird and unsubstantiated. For example, if I theorize that humans evolved from space aliens, semantics suggests that my theory is just as valid as evolution theory. After all, they're both just theories, right?

Creationists are entitled to their beliefs, but their understanding of "theory" is the common definition, not the scientific one. So why do scientists continue to base their entire structure (i.e., observation of FACTS) on a word whose common meaning is the opposite? Come on, scientists! Have you no synonyms? Get us out of this stupid waste of time by updating your language to say what you really mean!

Larry Carter,

Lawrence

Comments

Jamesaust 9 years, 6 months ago

So..... We are born in ignorance and some of us fail to manage to crawl out of that state and, what's more, this is the fault of scientists?
I believe this nomenclature aspect fails to describe the problem adequately.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.