Ceteloguing the Tricks Theists Play

[FatAndFaithless]

There is no degree of a model that is more 'upgraded' than a theory, Drippy, because science isn't in the business of making flat, absolute assertions.

well, except where scientific absolutes, and laws are concerned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law

Youre slipping FF

Ahem.

From the very article you linked.

Laws differ from scientific theories in that they do not posit a mechanism or explanation of phenomena: they are merely distillations of the results of repeated observation.

Now if you'll just look at the definition of scientific theory from the same site...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory#Defi...anizations

It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics)...One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed.

Seriously Drich, saying "well it's not a LAW" is fifth grade shit. You must be able to understand the difference between the observation (or law) and the explanation or mechanism (theory).

For example, one 'law' could be..."Objects tend to fall towards the center of the earth, and this has a general acceleration of 9.8 m/s^2 after repeated observation". There's your 'law' of gravity. The thoery of gravity explains why and how that works.

You're drippin' Drich.