Topic: Are scientific theories always fact? (Read 181 times)
No theory can be a fact... And that's a fact.
I'm counting. that need hard databaselist always, irrespective of, about what was going on. If there is a scientific fact, then it is proved, and it can be proved by other people
Things like electricity were probably once science fiction. Until some scientist came along, well okay, Thomas Edison. Standing on the shoulders of giants, or rather building on previous research, he made the ultimate discovery. Scientific theories are scientific theories. When they are proven, we know they are facts.
Scientific theories are not facts until it is proved by the research. Until then, theory remains theory.
By just reading the definitions, theory is not always equal to fact that's why it's just a theory.
I agree. But definitions of scientific theory go to great lengths, at times, to make it look like the theory is fact, when everybody knows that scientific theory can be changed on a moment's notice when it is found to be wrong. This shows that scientific theory is still theory. The difference is that it usually has much more study behind it than regular theory.
By just reading the definitions, theory is not always equal to fact that's why it's just a theory.
There is absolutely no way to verify every possible scenario in order to eliminate any potential opposition. Striving to verify that your data is correct within a certainty of 5 standard deviations is good enough in my opinion. Also, have you read the flat Earth thread? There is going to be some opposition no matter how sound the scientific theory is. 
Furthermore, most scientific theories are reasonable approximations. Take Newton's laws of motion and gravity. Both special and general relativity are better theories and more accurate. However, using Newton's laws are good enough to calculate the trajectory of a rocket to a planet...
Furthermore, most scientific theories are reasonable approximations. Take Newton's laws of motion and gravity. Both special and general relativity are better theories and more accurate. However, using Newton's laws are good enough to calculate the trajectory of a rocket to a planet...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact#In_science
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory
/thread
I don't get why this is in politics & society when it belongs in off-topic at best.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory
/thread
I don't get why this is in politics & society when it belongs in off-topic at best.
I believe that scientific theories are useful. They provide organized ways to ad knowledge to scientific understandings. But I also believe that scientific theories are not totally fact... until the scientific community can eliminate any potential opposition to a theory in question.
Do you think that some scientific theories should be considered fact? If you do, should they be based on proof, or is strong evidence enough? What do you think?
Do you think that some scientific theories should be considered fact? If you do, should they be based on proof, or is strong evidence enough? What do you think?
Jump to: