Wait a minute. I have to admit something. This blog annoyed me and that's probably why I'm dishing out the snark now. See, there's a Christian Worldview section. Uh huh. That's where the blog authors like to post stuff like this:
Both claim to be based on “science”, yet neither one is observable, repeatable, nor testable. They are both presented as fact in spite of this. And even though evolution is still the theory of evolution last time I checked, when you see it presented in the media, the word theory is seldom used.
First off, there are a freakin' pile of Christians for whom this stuff is NOT part of their Christian worldview. Be specific. Label the section "Evangelical Literalist Christian Worldview," and leave me and the majority of Christians, who have no problem with evolution, out of your issues. Okay?
Second, don't go on about what's science and what isn't if you don't even understand what the word theory means in relation to science. For future reference:
In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition.
Honestly, that's basic science. Calling something a theory in relation to science has real weight. Think of Atomic Theory for instance. Is someone going to seriously argue that because the word theory is used we're not really splitting atoms or electrons don't exist?