Re: [Phys-l] Global Evolution as fact

[David Bowman <David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu>]

Regarding:

>  ...
> Global evolution, based on diversity and natural selection, is a  
> remarkable achievement of science. I buy it. It makes sense. But to  
> state that it is fact? ...............
>
> Bill

In science theories are constructed as explanatory frameworks for
understanding data sets that can be called facts.  Often a field of
science uses the same name for the data set as is used for the
explanation.  For instance the Theory of Evolution is the scientific
explanation (explanatory framework, or model) of the observed facts
pertaining to evolution.  Both the fact of evolution (data set)
and the theory of evolution are given the same name, i.e. evolution.

Likewise, a theory of gravity is an explanation (model or framework
for understanding) of the fact of gravity.  The fact of gravity is a
name for a data set containing a myriad of observations of the
behaviors of physical things that taken together are called gravity.
A theory of gravity, say Newton's theory, or maybe, General
Relativity, is a scientific explanatory framework that explains the
data set of the gravitational effects we see.  Both the observed
fact of gravity and the Theory of Gravity are given the same name,
i.e. gravity.

I think when Larry wrote "When the data that exist consist of
countless pieces of information from diverse fields, all of which
are only consistent with the global evolution of species, with not
one counterexample, then global evolution of species is not just a
reasonable inference, it is indeed a fact." this was a case of using
a set of facts to infer another fact from them.  It was *not* an
instance of calling a theory a fact.  Rather, it was an instance of
concluding that a very robust inference from a large and varied set
of facts is itself a fact.  It did not invoke any theoretical
explanation of the fact of global evolution, only that the existence
of global evolution does indeed happen to be a fact in its own right.
But the scientific explanation of this fact is to be found in a
theory of evolution, such as the successful neodarwinian theory
supplemented by some later extensions, e.g. the mechanisms of
speciation, the theory of punctuated equilibrium, etc.  But, in any
event, the fact of evolution and the theory of evolution are two
different categories of things with a common name, and I do not
think Larry identified them with each other.

David Bowman