Posted this before, but there are some posts in this discussion that seem to indicate a lack of understanding between what laws and theories actually are. Here it is:
"Laws describe. Theories explain. Never in the history of science has a theory become a law."
Theories are different than laws and cannot 'graduate' into laws. Being a law or being a theory does not make one more factual than the other. Both are observations that are excepted by the scientific community and are supported by a lot of evidence or studies.
There are no 'gaps' in the evolutionary theory. There is no evidence that goes against it and for the time being it explains every observation of the development of life that has been collected or observed.
Perhaps you are referring to 'gaps in the fossil evidence'? Again, there are no 'gaps' in the areas of knowledge where the theory of evolution is refuted. Sure, geological conditions have not favored the fossilization of all skeletal bodies that have ever existed on the Earth, so you can say there are 'gaps' as there are organisms that were never fossilized and thus remain unidentified and lost to time; however, evolution still is not refuted. It is supported by all branches of biological/chemical sciences, and further supported by periphery evidence provided by geological and astronomical studies.
Here is a further video that accurately describes what scientific laws and scientific theories are:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2xhPgDuUlA&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Scientific Law vs Scientific Theory[/ame]
And a nice quote from Richard Dawkins (who I am sure you all know about) about Kirk Cameron and his recent tirade in sending out creationist propaganda in universities:
"There is no refutation of Darwinian evolution in existence. If a refutation ever were to come about, it would come from a scientist, and not an idiot."
To argue against the evolutionary theory is to argue from a position of gross ignorance of scientific discoveries and evidence. I don't even see why this 'debate' is even considered in the general population. There is almost no dissent in the branches of science (there are always those few delusional people on the fringe) because of the vast amount of evidence and logic behind it.
Edited by aero18, 02 December 2009 - 09:26 AM.