One distinction between science and religion is science' willing acceptance of uncertainty. Probability is calculated, but a scientific "sure thing" is about as rare as a unicorn. Hence, science speaks in terms of theory, likely outcomes, etc. Religion, for no rational reason, insists on certainty, which does not jive with their insistence on "faith." If the religious will not recognize the cognitive dissonance with their insistence on certainty and faith they will not understand the scientific community's use of the word "theory."

Evolution is a fact.... A proven theory....

Science is just an opinion !!!

Yah---and gravity is a theory. An hypothesis is based on a theory in the works---maybe. A theory is grounded in a tremendous amt of workable data.

Creationists don't understand that "theory" in science can be used to refer to all areas within a certain field of study. Such as "The theory of gravity", or "the theory of flight." Granted it might be more clear if they said "the law of gravity", "the laws of flight" or the laws of evolution", but saying something is law or fact, implies rigid beliefs, which leaves little room for new discovery and gien tuning of existing ideas. using the word "theory" leave more room for the freedom to explore new ideas.

It is all a matter of semantics. Words and their meanings can be very powerful and culturally influentual depending on how they are used. The words you choose can have both pros and cons.

I'd be more comfortable with "best known facts" than simply "facts" when discussing evolution.

Yah.. I had that argument with one of those loons long ago … and suggested he try defying ‘the Theory of Gravity’ ...don’t recall what happened to him ..maybe the authorities scraped him off a sidewalk