Jesus fucking christ people need to learn to accept that there is a layman's definition of 'theory' and a scientific definition of 'theory'.
Jesus fucking christ people need to learn to accept that there is a layman's definition of 'theory' and a scientific definition of 'theory'.
It's a bit more than that since there is some of the layman use getting into the scientific community. It can also be a bit difficult to correct too because some people, when told how things are done and it's different than what they do, blow it off like they're the ones who make the rules. It's rare, but it happens.
So the short answer to the OP is: If there's some communication confusion make sure to define the words you're using and see if that's different from how the other person defines the words.
A scientist would most likely phrase it something like "No black specimens have been documented in X ". X being whatever swan species is being studied.
Now did you have an actual point or just trying to be contrary?
---------- Post added 2012-11-20 at 11:31 PM ----------
A single supported hypothesis, one that has not been proven false, doesn't a theory make. It takes a lot more evidence than that. And we don't prove hypotheses. You try to disprove the null hypothesis. It may seem like semantics or splitting hairs but it's important to approach all science in this manner so as to leave everything open to be rejected or proven false. Approaching phenomena this way allows us to continually improve our knowledge and understanding instead of stating absolutes.
To add to the list:
Law: A description of consistent phenomena that does not explain the source of the phenomenon.
---------- Post added 2012-11-21 at 01:12 AM ----------
How to Demonstrate a Lack of Understanding of the Scientific Method in A Few Easy Steps:
1. Insist that the simplest explanation is not usually the best.
2. State that because there is a correlation, the relationship MUST be causitive.
3. Say 'it's just a theory' when describing a Theory such as Evolution or Relativity.
4. Ask why it's not called the "Law of Evolution".
5. Dismiss peer consensus as not mattering.
6. Insist that the findings of case studies can be applied to the general population.
Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi