One-liner proposal

[Ariphaos]

To combat the infamous "evolution is a theory, not a fact" one-liner, I recently came up with "To attack a scientific theory for not being a fact is like attacking a mathematical equation for not being a number."

What do you think? It's so hard to come up with snappy one-liners to combat the incredibly simplistic thinking of creationists. By nature, complex ideas are harder to express than simplistic thoughts, and this one sort of requires that one does in fact understand the importance of mathematical equations as opposed to numbers, which I'm not sure everyone does.

You lost most of them at 'scientific'. They often consider science to be a religion.

If you want a similar route, I would go with "And an equation is not a number." This will get the point across that their line of thinking is not necessarily accurate. You are looking to convey meaning, not engineering specifications, and once they start asking genuine questions, you have the upper hand.

[Alferd Packer]

Cribbing from one of Isaac Asimov's quotes on the subject, you could respond to "Evolution is just a theory" with "Creationists make it sound like a 'theory' is something you come up with after being wasted all night." This puts them on the defensive, because now the audience is thinks that the creationist is attacking all scientific theories, including the patently obvious ones(gravity, for example).

[Eleas]

I agree that a lot of people who say "it's just a theory" are either liars or idiots and are thus beyond reaching with any argument or analogy, but I suspect that there are lot of people who try to occupy a middle ground and who, if not actually completely swayed by the "it's just a theory" argument, find it vaguely persuasive in the sense that it reduces the credibility of evolution, if not demolishing it.

Thing is, if they do find it vaguely persuasive, it's usually also because they find if vaguely appealing. I suspect that argument is usually repeated by rote simply because the person though it sounded good when he heard it. Most people, even willfully stupid ones, recognize that simple solutions only work if they aren't stupid. I think you just need to show, in terms equally as simple as the argument itself, its implications.

At the same time, yeah, the concept of what a theory really is should be hammered home. So, in reply to the original one-liner, I'd simply say "let's say I show you a photo of a man. Would you say the man on the photo was 'just a picture'? Of course not. The picture is of the man, just as the theory is a theory about evolution, not evolution itself. You're basically saying the man doesn't exist because the photo has a coffee stain in the corner."

[Shroom Man 777]

You could say "Germ Theory is also just a theory. Go ahead and get yourself some syphillis."

[Eleas]

You could say "Germ Theory is also just a theory. Go ahead and get yourself some syphillis."

...which would be helpful if there weren't so many respected people in the media claiming exactly that.

[ThomasP]

I like retorting with "Gravity's just a theory too."

They've all heard that one a million times. In their minds, it's not even remotely analogous because gravity is intuitively obvious, and evolution isn't. You have to remember that a lot of people "think with the gut".

"I can see a rock drop, but I've never seen a chicken turn into a fish."

I'd expect something along those lines.

[Formless]

What about shooting back "a scientific theory can also be a science fact"? I've seen this one used by (I think it was) YouTube user cdk007 a couple times when explaining why this one-liner argument is wrong, usually as a way of leading into an explanation of why Evolution can be considered a fact in the context of the biosciences. Its simple, and gets across the point in few words, but I fear it might be slightly misleading or confusing. Thoughts?

[Emerson33260]

How about, "Christianity is only a theory until you can prove Muhammed is not the messenger of God." I haven't yet had a Muslim prosthyletizer come to my door, but debates starting from there have also sent away people seeking to increase my Krishna Consciousness.

[Wyrm]

"So is nuclear fission, but I treat atom bombs with respect."

"So is quantum mechanics, yet I see you wearing a digital wristwatch."

"So is germ theory, yet you wash your hands. Hopefully."

The point is to get across that a scientific theory is not just a guess, but is well-developed and generates useful results.

[mr friendly guy]

I like retorting with "Gravity's just a theory too."

They've all heard that one a million times. In their minds, it's not even remotely analogous because gravity is intuitively obvious, and evolution isn't. You have to remember that a lot of people "think with the gut".

"I can see a rock drop, but I've never seen a chicken turn into a fish."

I'd expect something along those lines.

We could fire back like evolution never claimed chicken turning into fish, but it takes the Bible to claim people turning into salt (in reference to Lot's wife).

[Elaro]

Well, if they're down to chucking clichés, I think a valid strategy would be to insult their capacity for independent thought.

C:"Evolution is a theory, not a fact!"
A:"Can you back that up without consulting your bumper sticker collection?"

Alternatively, if they're only using the argument, then I think vulgarizing the concept of a scientific theory is in order.

C:[Something that sounds like Evolution is a theory, not a fact]
A: "Yeah, and my map isn't the city of Washington. But I'd be stupid if I didn't use it to plan out my trips there, though."

And then you draw them out into saying that evolution is inaccurate, when you then accuse them of being arrogant asses, for believing that they know better than people who've actually gone to look at the process themselves.

[Simon_Jester]

You could say "Germ Theory is also just a theory. Go ahead and get yourself some syphillis."

...which would be helpful if there weren't so many respected people in the media claiming exactly that.

Yes, but they are not nearly so widely believed as creationists. MOST people, including the average/slightly sub-average people who are your intended audience here, know about germs and believe in them.

You might run into ignorant morons who don't believe in germs, but they're such a tiny minority that the only way to live is to behave as if they do not exist and treat any you meet as freakish exceptions to the norm.

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

I like Ray's idea.

C "Evolution is just a theory."

A "Well, you're just an idiot."

[Formless]

Why didn't I think of this one before?

C: "Evolution is just a theory, not a fact"

A: "Yeah, and by the same logic if you ever get kicked in the teeth you can take comfort in the fact that Karate is just a martial art."

[Feil]

Why not just answer with the truth?

A scientific theory is a well-supported explanation of facts. Evolution is a fact. The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection - which is often misleadingly abbreviated as the 'Theory of Evolution' or, worse still, just 'Evolution' - is the theory that explains it.

[Akkleptos]

"God! I challenge you to smite me down, for I have come to lead your beloved sheep astray with reason!
If you don't, I may succeed in doing so, and souls would be lost forever, according to what we've been told for centuries! Don't you care about that?"

A bit extreme, I admit. But that way, it's like: either god strikes you down, and we know he exists, or B) God fails to shut you up, meaning he doesn't care about his believers --> very likely he doesn't exist or at least he's not the all-loving being most people think he is.

To try only over the internet. Theatrics like this got me an ankle broken in more places than I can remember. If it weren't for surgery, metal plates and screws, I'd be walking with a limp today.

[JBG]

To combat the infamous "evolution is a theory, not a fact" one-liner, I recently came up with "To attack a scientific theory for not being a fact is like attacking a mathematical equation for not being a number."

What do you think? It's so hard to come up with snappy one-liners to combat the incredibly simplistic thinking of creationists. By nature, complex ideas are harder to express than simplistic thoughts, and this one sort of requires that one does in fact understand the importance of mathematical equations as opposed to numbers, which I'm not sure everyone does.

I like it. A little limited but all attempts at one liners are. Using maths puts it beyond most of the objections.

The problem is, as has been discussed already, that true believers, eg fundies, are impervious to such. They discern only noise, not signal in such rebuttals. Where you may get some traction is amongst those with still functioning brains as they may be susceptable to such a cognitive shock. Hopefully.

One quibble with some posts. Evolution is, actually, just a theory. However it is one with an incredibly strong and getting stronger track record for predicting and describing phenomena, which, at the end of the day, is what science is all about. Back to Mike's point.

[Formless]

Evolution is, actually, just a theory. However it is one with an incredibly strong and getting stronger track record for predicting and describing phenomena, which, at the end of the day, is what science is all about. Back to Mike's point.

My Bio II class disagrees. Evolution is in fact a fact; to biologists the word is used to describe the observed change of species over time in the fossil record and the observed variation between species in the present. The theory of evolution drafted by Darwin is what most people are familiar with when the word "evolution" is used, but technically Lamarck's theories were also intended to explain evolution before Darwin even though the mechanism he proposed has obviously been discredited, so they also qualify as a "theory of evolution". Like Feil said its common usage is misleading, so most people are unaware of this fact.

However the issue with the "Evolution is a theory, not a fact" one liner is that it reveals a misunderstanding about science far more basic than that that absolutely needs to be addressed. Science will NOT win the day if people still can't tell a hypothesis from a theory from shit they pulled out of their ass.

[Ryan Thunder]

"God! I challenge you to smite me down, for I have come to lead your beloved sheep astray with reason!
If you don't, I may succeed in doing so, and souls would be lost forever, according to what we've been told for centuries! Don't you care about that?"

It'd never work, though. Take it from one who's been subjected to it often enough;
"God! I challenge you to smite me down, for I have come to lead your beloved sheep astray with reason!"
"Why would He even bother? You're nobody."

Or something to that effect.

[JBG]

Evolution is, actually, just a theory. However it is one with an incredibly strong and getting stronger track record for predicting and describing phenomena, which, at the end of the day, is what science is all about. Back to Mike's point.

My Bio II class disagrees. Evolution is in fact a fact; to biologists the word is used to describe the observed change of species over time in the fossil record and the observed variation between species in the present. The theory of evolution drafted by Darwin is what most people are familiar with when the word "evolution" is used, but technically Lamarck's theories were also intended to explain evolution before Darwin even though the mechanism he proposed has obviously been discredited, so they also qualify as a "theory of evolution". Like Feil said its common usage is misleading, so most people are unaware of this fact.

However the issue with the "Evolution is a theory, not a fact" one liner is that it reveals a misunderstanding about science far more basic than that that absolutely needs to be addressed. Science will NOT win the day if people still can't tell a hypothesis from a theory from shit they pulled out of their ass.

I suspect that we're probably totally in agreement at the end of the day.

"Before Darwin"? I'm struggling to remember his name at present but there was a Scottish aborialist who published a book, appended to which was a pretty good for its time exposition of evolution to explain observed phenomena.

Lamarck understood the driver but not the mechanism. He has given us our system of nomenclature for new flora and fauna though.

[Jeremy]

I think the Brawndo Dialogue perfectly describes any sort of conversation with such persons.

Depending on how expansive a mood your opponent is in, science ranges from Satanism to a wasteful, silly plaything. These people do not recognize scientific inquiry as having any results; not their automobile, not their walking shoe, not their toothpaste, not their plumbing fixtures, not their grocery store, not their DVD Player, not their rifle, and certainly not their deodorant.

I've had people who refuse to admit that God would or could use evolution, also seriously argue to me that children have no need for education beyond simple algebra or letter composition, other than vocational. I've had people argue to me that this education should take place after children become teenagers and have had a chance to work already. Child labor work--"on farms and stuff". The only redeeming thing was that Parents had a responsibility to teach their children reading, writing, and addition.

No, they didn't bathe regularly, and yes, their teeth were rotted. One voted for Fred Thompson because he wanted a President who "had a hard dick".


I think the root is arrogance. From arrogance comes their squalor and if their squalor is quantified they are embarrassed, and so they oppose the enlightening reform of education. The only remedy is to stand against them in economic competition and allow their miserable ethic to fail completely.

Evolution is just a theory

And a theory is better than a story used as a superstition.

[Akkleptos]

"God! I challenge you to smite me down, for I have come to lead your beloved sheep astray with reason!
If you don't, I may succeed in doing so, and souls would be lost forever, according to what we've been told for centuries! Don't you care about that?"

It'd never work, though. Take it from one who's been subjected to it often enough;
"God! I challenge you to smite me down, for I have come to lead your beloved sheep astray with reason!"
"Why would He even bother? You're nobody."

Or something to that effect.

"Who say's I'm nobody?
I dare you HEATHENS!!!

As it was read in Romans 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.!


Some WASP: "Hey, that's not the thruth of the Lord!
Sayeth unto them "3:13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
3:14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
3:15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
3:16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
3:17 And the way of peace have they not known:
3:18 There is no fear of God before their eyes"

[mr friendly guy]

"God! I challenge you to smite me down, for I have come to lead your beloved sheep astray with reason!
If you don't, I may succeed in doing so, and souls would be lost forever, according to what we've been told for centuries! Don't you care about that?"

It'd never work, though. Take it from one who's been subjected to it often enough;
"God! I challenge you to smite me down, for I have come to lead your beloved sheep astray with reason!"
"Why would He even bother? You're nobody."

Or something to that effect.

Perhaps we could reply with why not? He turned supposedly destroyed an entire city for the oh so great crime of being gay, not to mention turning a woman into salt for looking at him doing his dirty work.

Or you could just ask why doesn't he do it, he is not scared is he? I guess thats why he needs believers to do the dirty work because God is just really a chicken shit.

[KroLazuxy_87]

If you actually think you /can/ convince them that evolution is everything that it actually is, the best tactic is probably not to engage in an argument. If the conversation starts with an argument, you have no hope of convincing them anytime soon to believe in evolution. A calm explanation of the science behind it peppered with anecdotes and analogies usually gets the message through smoother. I've closely watched four people in the last year completely lose their faith after joining my fraternity house(my bad...) and I've always been able to reach them on a deeper level with kind words and patience.

These people have been methodically brainwashed by organizations that have had 2000 years of practice. Treating them gently like victims isn't out of the question. Plenty of knowledge about both their religion and evolution along with some understanding of their personal history is all takes to walk them through a steady conversion.

So I'd go with something like, "A Theory is not a Hypothesis, it's an explanation of how the facts and laws come together." I like to use the word hypothesis, because it's the same kind of scientific word that Theory is, but it more accurately describes what they are interpreting theory as. Anyone who's gone through 3rd grade science or done a science fair project will instantly recognize the word. /Ideally/ the juxtaposition of the two words will highlight the fact they don't both mean the same thing.
_______________________
Naturally, they're are some people beyond saving. I'd advise simply avoiding them: your blood pressure will thank you later. A decent line for the crazies could go something like, "Go look up what Theory really means and if you still want to argue after that, just jump off a bridge instead of wasting my time." Ok, maybe not practical unless you're trying to start a screaming match, but it'd sure feel good to tell off a rabid Fundy...

[Elaro]

Guys, fundamentalists are just mentally ill people who weren't diagnosed. I don't think reason is going to work, and being belligerent is just going to get them on the defensive, and they're going to stop listening to you. We need to be calm and fair-minded. And if they try to get our goat, let's be the bigger (wo/)man here. Kindness from the heathen will go a long way towards disproving the "religion means good" meme that society tends to believe.

One-liners are just soundbites, really. I don't think they're going to convince anyone. Like many others said, we need to explain, and possibly show, evolution at work. Everything else is just sinking to the crazie's level.