I have to say, this is so me! Ok, well, I don’t shout it out loud and wave my fists everywhere, but I certainly DO get irritated that everything evolution-related is stated as Fact and not as Theory. I mean why did we just toss out the creation foundation when a man (fallible) published his idea for the masses?
It really wouldn’t be so difficult to throw in “hypothetically speaking,” or “theoretically,” or even “the general consensus is” at the beginning of a statement, or even just a blip at the beginning of the nature episode; but I believe it to be a tragic mistake to continue reporting things in such a way as it comes across as Fact or Truth when it is indeed a Theory or Idea. (And, yes, if they were reporting nature tv from a creationist perspective, I would agree that maybe they should still use those phrases. When it comes to science, we put way too much faith in what the ‘science’ says, we don’t recognize there could actually be a mistake in the testing or the testing tools themselves. We need to be open to the fact that even science can err.)
Evolution is quite an amazing thing. The science behind it is just mind-boggling and fascinating. However, Creation uses the very same scientific evidence; it’s just interpreted differently and, I would argue, answers even more questions and fills in those pesky gaps (say for instance, the Cambrian Explosion).
Just another topic for you to start a creation conversation. God bless!