Is evolution based on empirical science?

[thranx]

Scoobes said:

thranx said:

KungKras said:

It must take a very closed mind to NOT accept evolution as a proven fact.

wow. where is all of this cold hard eveidence than? Fact is evolution is still not a fact. Let alone a proven fact. It is just the only viable theory we have on how life came to be, but it is most certainly not a proven fact. Yes there is evedence for it, but to be a proven fact it takes more than evidence. It has to be undeniable and overwhelming eveidnece or reproducable in a controlled enviroment. which we do not have yet. Its very closed minded to take snippets of information and form a "fact" from it that you can not prove.

It may as well be a fact. It's been oberved, tested and proven. There are some details of evolution that are unknown, but we know that evolution does occur. We even manipulate molecular evolution to help create therapeutic proteins and biochemicals. If it wasn't fact, then many drugs wouldn't exist. 

@ bolded

That's not actually evolution. Evolution explains life's diversity, but not the origins.

that is what i meant. No one was talking origin of life so i din't clarify that well. I dont argue that we can't manipulate it and that it hasn't occured. I completly agree. I am only saying it is very close minded to not acknowledge that we have not been able to proove and recreate evolution so we can not say it is an absolute fact. Doing so makes science into more of religion or faith based instead of fact based. I dont want science to go down that path. When we can proove it with out any doubt by recreating it than it will be a fact. Faith should be left to religion not science.

Its been observed, but not tested and proven.