[rmrfrmrf]

But that's what "theory" means. It is, in fact, a guess; a guess that could be flat-out wrong the second a piece of contradictory evidence comes to light.

But, instead of acknowledging that, for some reason a large group of Science Defenders have chosen this hill to die on where actually theory means infallible truth that mustn't be challenged, especially not from the likes of the common man.

There is such a drive to prove the religious wrong that we've thrown the baby out with the bathwater and created some kind of anti-religion where all skepticism is immediately put down and skeptics are excommunicated.

[hannasanarion]

"Theory" does not mean "guess", it means a comprehensive explanation that has been shown on many occasions to make predictions that are more accurate than any alternative explanations.

A guess in science is called a "hypothesis", it is only after it is proven right that it is properly called "theory".

There are infallible truths in science. We call them "observations". Any idea that follows from existing observations and has been used to predict new ones can be reasonably believed to be correct, but the truth is not the idea, it is the observations that inspired it.

And this is exactly why the public needs a better understanding of how science works.

If you really insist on making religious comparisons, a theory is neither a guess, nor an infallible truth, but a prophet who we trust because they make no predictions that cannot be verified, and because they have never been wrong so far, and so we will continue to believe them until the moment one of their predictions proves incorrect, at which time we will stop believing without hesitation.

[rmrfrmrf]

The problem, as mentioned above, is that the public understands exactly how science works, and it makes the scientists (and the companies paying the scientists) very upset.