Boyles Law and the 2nd law are Laws because we can prove them. They trump theories hand down. If you have a theory which goes against, as evolution does, the laws we know - one is wrong.
What has happened for a hundred or so years now is that the theory of evolution has been placed in a glass case and no law can influence it. No way. It is God in science. Laws do not effect it.
Here is a good definition of "theory:"
Theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses. Theories do not grow up to be laws. Theories explain laws.
Theory: A scientifically testable general principle or body of principles offered to explain observed phenomena. In scientific usage, a theory is distinct from a hypothesis (or conjecture) that is proposed to explain previously observed phenomena. For a hypothesis to rise to the level of theory, it must predict the existence of new phenomena that are subsequently observed. A theory can be overturned if new phenomena are observed that directly contradict the theory. (Source)
When a scientific theory has a long history of being supported by verifiable evidence, it is appropriate to speak about "acceptance" of (not "belief" in) the theory; or we can say that we have "confidence" (not "faith") in the theory. It is the dependence on verifiable data and the capability of testing that distinguish scientific theories from matters of faith.
And a definition of "law:"
Law: a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature; "the laws of thermodynamics."
Laws are often expressed as mathematical formulas, and are very limited in scope. And, as noted above,
theories explain laws.
Off topic material hidden
The word create is the anti-thesis of modern science.
You are correct. Creationism is the antithesis of science. One relies on evidence and verification of that evidence, while the other relies on "divine" revelation, scripture, belief, myth, and a number of other non-empirical forms of "evidence."
Read up a bit on science, and leave those creationist websites alone for a while. Your posts will be a lot more accurate for it.
Edited by AdminNosy, : No reason given.
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
™ Version 4.2