Laws, theories, and damn good ideas.

My sister:    “… come on.  Scientists don't know – evolution is just a theory!”

Me:        “That’s right!  It’s just a theory – like gravity!!”

My wife:    <ahem> “Gravity is a law.”

Me:          "Yes ..."

So – which of us is right here?   (Hint – it’s my blog.  Ergo …. )

Astute reader:    “You are right, o blogger.”

Me:         “True – and they can be as right as they want to be when they have their own damn blogs.”

So – let’s start dissecting this.  First, with gravity.  Is it a law or a theory?

Yes.

Think  theoretical and applied.  Applied = law.  Theoretical = theory.  (guess you saw that second one coming.)

What gravity does is applied/law.  Things fall.  Over and over again.  Only mystics have been observed to levitate, and then only by themselves and their cats.  Objects are attracted to one another based on their mass.  All the time.  No comment as regards attraction between people.  Just going to let it lie.

How gravity functions – still a lot of theory there, the last time I read “Gravity for Dummies”.  Exact mechanisms, and how variants mitigate that gravitational pull – theoretical.

So is gravity a theory or a law?

No.

It’s both.

Evolution.  Is it a theory or a law?

That evolution on some scale occurs is fact/law.  We can observe it in adaptive mechanisms in wildlife, including body shapes and characteristics, we can observe it in the presence of vestigial organs in the body, etc.  We can observe what happens as nutrition and medicine improve, environments change, and different racial groups intermingle.  We observe it in viruses and bacteria adapting to hostile environments and finding ways to thrive.   It. Is. Fact.

That we are still learning about the history of long term evolution processes is true.  That our understanding of evolution itself is evolving is also a true statement.  Evolution is a complex process that we can’t package and explain with a single equation.  There are inconsistencies in the data, and even paradoxes to work through, which takes time.  There's much discussion and debate among scientists, so it’s fair that lay people, and that includes evolution-antagonists, debate evolutionary theory.  But it’s also only fair to engage the debate at the current point, challenging currently held theories.  Unfortunately, some people find it safer to challenge evolution by shooting holes in Darwin’s nascent theories.

It’s easier to take pot shots at something that is version 1.0 than version 11.8.  It’s a little like arguing the superiority of Macs and PCs, but basing your opposition to PCs on your complaints about DOS 2.0, rather than Windows 7.  It’s also easier when you are willing to lie to yourself, or to other people, about what the data at hand is actually saying.  We’ve probably all done that at times, though.  People are fallible, and we can get maniacally defensive about something we have an emotional interest in, particularly something that *might* seem to touch on issues “better left to religion.”  This is how jihads, crusades, and other holy wars happen.  But don’t expect a blathering rant about the evils of religion.  I’m very comfortable with my own toolbox – letting science tackle issues of how and when, and letting religion handle matters of why.  I have a hammer and a screwdriver.  More importantly, I can tell the difference between a nail and a screw.

One last comment before either you or I fall asleep.  Not that I was wrong, but on points, my wife wins.  Yes, gravity is law.  Yes, gravity is theory.  But the fact is that the fact of gravity is more significant than the theory of it is.

And at the end of the day, both gravity and evolution aren't just theories and laws - they're both damn good ideas.  I personally intend to keep evolving AND to not drift off into space while doing so.

Hate it when that happens.