The War on Science tick tick Boom
"Attacks paid for by big business are 'driving science into a dark era"
"Last week Nina Fedoroff, the president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), broke ranks in a spectacular manner."
"She confessed that she was now "scared to death" by the anti-science movement that was spreading, uncontrolled, across the US and the rest of the western world."
It's an era of )fundationism( funded anti science or pseudo science & attacks on College professors & their research. Funded by corporations who have an interest to keep things to their liking.
(please read the link otherwise it will just be another muddy post)
When an idea gets confuse with a term when people understand technical words with technical definitions to mean whatever floats into their heads is fertile ground for this war.
A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.
A law generalizes a body of observations. At the time it is made, no exceptions have been found to a law. Scientific laws explain things, but they do not describe them. One way to tell a law and a theory apart is to ask if the description gives you a means to explain 'why'.
Example: Consider Newton's Law of Gravity. Newton could use this law to predict the behavior of a dropped object, but he couldn't explain why it happened.
Common response "well I think"
Here is a link that might be useful: Fundationism