I\’ve been watching (and enjoying) the new take on Carl Sagan\’s classic Cosmos series about the universe (this time around hosted by the entertaining Neil deGrass Tyson), but I\’m not too good about watching stuff when it\’s initially broadcast (and I don\’t have a DVR), so I\’ve been watching it after the fact on Hulu.
It was during one such catchup session that Dr Tyson stated emphatically that \’the theory of evolution is a scientific fact\’.
Before you ask me if I\’m a creationist or an intelligent design advocate, I don\’t disagree with the spirit of the statement made. Also, I\’m disappointed that you have such a low opinion of me. That said, I would hope that a programme supposedly trying to raise public interest in science would be a bit more rigorous in terms of making statements like that, i.e. something like \’Evolution is the theory that is best supported by the evidence that we have collected so far\’. The original statement implies evolution is incontrovertible, whereas the version here suggests that we may discard it and seek a new theory if new evidence surfaces that cannot be reconciled with the current theory. Which is in fact what scientists on the cutting edge of the discipline do routinely.
Probably not snappy enough for TV?