The problem is it does mean "conjecture"...
.. in most common definitions.

I take the second definition from dictionary.com as an example, but 6th & 7th are more damning.

Theory : a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

Thus the "theory" of evolution is conjectural and not a fact.

I do not believe this at all, but that's what it means to most people.

I would be delighted if you would take on the task of explaining the true meaning to the populous at large (please start with the US), but until that is achieved, evolution is not a "theory" as most people use the word.

Edit - This is the danger of scientific words having "real world" meanings, but is that worse than when papers were written in Latin and only other scientists could understand them? The only solution is a good broad scientific education for all, but that becomes an ever more distant dream.
( Ugi , it's a game of give and cake, Thu 19 Mar 2009, 16:59, 1 reply)

But it ISN'T a fact, though
that's the problem. It is conjectural.

Also, it's "real-world" meaning IS scientific.

I know I may be debating semantics - and I see your point - but in the case of this word, to suggest we should allow this because that's what it means to "most people" (actually I'm not convinced that's true either) doesn't wash.

I'll happily accept misuse of scientific definitions by the general public in non-scientific arenas, but in this case you're talking about a complete misuse of a word's meaning within a context whereby ONLY that meaning is valid, and that's not acceptable, at least to me.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 19 Mar 2009, 17:10, closed)

I agree that it's not a fact.
And I never meant to imply that I thought it was. Apologies if that's how it seemed. I was presenting the anti-evolution argument as it is often presented.

The thing is that it's not a guess either, which is much closer to what "theory" means to most.

I will happily accept that one should not say "it's not a theory" because strictly it is. It's rather like saying a pumpkin is not a fruit. The fact that it is does not mean you should put it in your fruit salad.
( Ugi , it's a game of give and cake, Thu 19 Mar 2009, 17:25, closed)

YEAH!
There's a difference between a conjecture and a shot in the dark.

Evolutionary theory is the former. Creationists treat it as though it was the latter.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Thu 19 Mar 2009, 17:44, closed)

I agree
I'm just refusing to give up on correct meaning because of how fuckwits interpret it ;)
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 19 Mar 2009, 18:05, closed)