PISA test question on evolution

[R. U. Serious]

The following is a question from the PISA-studies (targeted at 15-year olds). I got into a discussion with friends whether the 3rd answer, which is the correct solution, is not formulated too weakly and at the same time the 4th is too strongly by implying that there could be anything like "proofs" in natural sciences as there are in mathematics/logic. Note that the question is supposed to to test knowledge of evolution, not conceptual differences between natural sciences and mathematics etc.

Am I simply over sensitized on the topic of evolution (by constant Creationist/ID "arguments" against it), or do you agree that the question below appears to reflect some odd political compromise designed to appease certain kinds of positions?

Question as translated from german by me
Evolution:
Which of the following statements fits best to the theory of evolution?

A The theory is not credible, because changes in species cannot be observed
B The theory of evolution is valid for animals, but not for humans
C The theory of evolution is a scientific theory, which currently rests on numerous observations
D Evolution is a theory, which has been proven correct through research

----
Question in Original phrasing, if somebody wants to correct my translation
Evolution:
Welche der folgenden Aussagen trifft am besten auf die Evolutionstheorie zu?

A Die Theorie ist unglaubwürdig, da Veränderungen der Arten nicht beobachtet werden können.
B Die Evolutionstheorie gilt für Tiere, nicht aber für den Menschen.
C Die Evolution ist eine wissenschaftliche Theorie, die sich gegenwärtig auf zahlreiche Beobachtungen stützt.
D Die Evolution ist eine Theorie, die durch Forschung bewiesen worden ist.

[Zixinus]

.

Am I simply over sensitized on the topic of evolution (by constant Creationist/ID "arguments" against it), or do you agree that the question below appears to reflect some odd political compromise designed to appease certain kinds of positions?

Could be very much. Then again, it depends on what is supposedly the correct answer.

[Zablorg]

If everything but C is wrong, it might simply be there to serve as a reminder that they are, in fact, wrong.

[R. U. Serious]

Then again, it depends on what is supposedly the correct answer.

The correct answer is C.

[mr friendly guy]

Thats what I thought the answer was. As such I don't particularly see it as a compromise, its simply the correct definition of theory as well as representing the fact that evolution has stood up to all the tests.

[Flagg]

Maybe it's lost in translation but both C and D seem like they would both be correct.

[B5B7]

D is incorrect because evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. Therefore only C is correct. Note that D makes no reference to the "theory of evolution".
Incidentally "theory of evolution" is shorthand for "the theory of evolution by natural selection"; it is the natural selection part that constitutes the theory.

[Dooey Jo]

D is incorrect because evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. Therefore only C is correct. Note that D makes no reference to the "theory of evolution".
Incidentally "theory of evolution" is shorthand for "the theory of evolution by natural selection"; it is the natural selection part that constitutes the theory.

C does not reference any "theory of evolution" in the original German, and a direct translation would be: "(The) evolution is a scientific theory [...]"
Also, the theory of evolution is way more than just natural selection.

[Gil Hamilton]

D is incorrect because evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. Therefore only C is correct. Note that D makes no reference to the "theory of evolution".
Incidentally "theory of evolution" is shorthand for "the theory of evolution by natural selection"; it is the natural selection part that constitutes the theory.

The Theory of Evolution is certainly a theory, in the proper use of the word. However, it is also a fact.

[Molyneux]

D is incorrect because evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. Therefore only C is correct. Note that D makes no reference to the "theory of evolution".
Incidentally "theory of evolution" is shorthand for "the theory of evolution by natural selection"; it is the natural selection part that constitutes the theory.

The Theory of Evolution is certainly a theory, in the proper use of the word. However, it is also a fact.

Wouldn't choice D simply be wrong because you can't 'prove' anything by experiment?

[D.Turtle]

Question as translated from german by me
C Evolution is a scientific theory that currently rests on numerous observations.
D Evolution is a theory that has been proven through research.

C Die Evolution ist eine wissenschaftliche Theorie, die sich gegenwärtig auf zahlreiche Beobachtungen stützt.
D Die Evolution ist eine Theorie, die durch Forschung bewiesen worden ist.

That is my translation.

Wouldn't choice D simply be wrong because you can't 'prove' anything by experiment?

It seems that that is the direction the question is supposed to be framed.

[Alyrium Denryle]

D is incorrect because evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. Therefore only C is correct. Note that D makes no reference to the "theory of evolution".
Incidentally "theory of evolution" is shorthand for "the theory of evolution by natural selection"; it is the natural selection part that constitutes the theory.

True, but in addition there are no actual proofs in science, just non-falsification.

[RIPP_n_WIPE]

I'm just curious, if evolution has been proven as fact then why do people keep calling it the "theory of evolution" and not "evolution" or "how shit happened?"

[Ghost Rider]

To answer RIPP and literally the stupidity of the thought. Laymen tend to not honestly understand what theory, hypothesis, and scientific law mean. Below is not a complete explaination but it's short enough to usually get the point across.

1. Hypothesis: An educated guess based upon observation. In here I could say "All ducks have orange bills." based upon an observation I made over the time I've been to a duck pond. Nothing more.

2. Theory: A set of explainations literally based upon a bunch of proven hypotheses, verified over and over, but able to be tweaked when new information enters the fray. A theory usually does not explain a single item such as gravity, but a larger set as relativity.

3. Scientific Law: A concises statement meant to explain an action. Usually the cornerstones of what we accept as fact. An example is gravity.

Now with all of the above, I could go into more, and there is more, but since this is about evolution, here lies in the problem. People who dislike evolution tend to go with that it's a theory and not a scientific law, WITHOUT explaining how their theory is proven sound or how the theory of evolution is an unsound theory. The fact a theory can be tweaked makes the ignorant believe that the entire basis is wrong rather then that new information can be entered and build a greater understanding of such.

[Gil Hamilton]

I'm just curious, if evolution has been proven as fact then why do people keep calling it the "theory of evolution" and not "evolution" or "how shit happened?"

Because "theory" is the correct word to use. A "proof" is, strictly speaking, a mathematical thing.

For instance, electromagnetism is a theory. We call it a fact because it is completely consistant with our observations and because we can build machines dependant on that theory to be true, which work. Such as the ones we are communicating with right now. Of course, I can't prove that very small and skilled elves are not at work here, rather than electricity, so it is not PROVEN. Does that make it less wrong?

It works the same with evolution. The word "theory" is a robust idea, actually, so don't let the people who've attached a negative connoctation on it fool you. People who sneer "Oh, that's just a theory..." are in fact referring to hypotheses or even just guesses, not theories themselves.

[Vendetta]

I'm just curious, if evolution has been proven as fact then why do people keep calling it the "theory of evolution" and not "evolution" or "how shit happened?"

Because evolution the fact and evolution the theory are different.

The fact is that populations change over time (the scientific definition is the change in the frequency of genes in comparison to their alleles among a population). The Theory of Evolution explains how that happens.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I'm just curious, if evolution has been proven as fact then why do people keep calling it the "theory of evolution" and not "evolution" or "how shit happened?"

The allele frequency of populations change over time. This is evolution and it is fact. The Theory of Evolution, otherwisae known as the modern synthesis or the neo-darwinian synthesis (which unified the old theiory of natural selection proposed by darwin with genetics) is the proposed and freakishly well tested mechanism for said change.

[RIPP_n_WIPE]

Right, k understood.