“Much in the world of science is conjecture, but then much is also fact. Evolution and creationism are both theories, because no one can prove otherwise.”

>>That evolution occurs is proven as fact by direct observation in living populations. Your correct that evolutionary theories should not be confused with facts. But your wrong in suggesting that creationism represents a theory, at least if your using the term as used in the natural sciences rather than as it’s used vernacularly (where it’s generally synonymous with ‘conjecture’.) In science, a theory is defined as a unifying and self consistent explanation of fundamental natural processes or phenomena constructed entirely of corroborated hypotheses, which explains observations within its scope in a tentative, comprehensive, falsifiable and predictive manner. Creationism isn’t predictive, it isn’t comprehensive, isn’t falsifiable and it is dogmatic rather than tentative. It derives from revelatory scripture rather than observations re: biological diversity, and it not only fails to comprehensively describe observations within its scope but it ignores those observations that aren’t compatible with a creationist model. It invokes supernatural entities and forces and violates parsimony by positing speculative deities. And finally creationism lacks any and all explanatory power—“god did it” doesn’t explain anything to any greater extent than “Pixies did it”.

“Gravity is IN FACT still a theory, because it cannot be proven 100%.”

>>You’ve got that backwards--it isn’t a theory because it cannot be proven 100%, it cannot be proven 100% because it’s a theory. Theories by definition may only be falsified, never proven. That doesn’t mean that they lack confidence, however, since theories derive confidence not from the possibility they may one day be proven true and somehow ‘graduate’ to become a fact, but from the fact that they already explain observations within their scope comprehensively and predictively.

“Theories can change, but facts cannot change. Facts are raw numbers, but do not confuse them with assumptions and conjecture.”

>>Similarly don’t confuse scientific theories with religious mythology.