This is where you go wrong. The terminology of science has shifted over the last 300 years. Partly because of the revolutions in physics that began about 100 years ago, there is MUCH less tendency to label scientific ideas as 'laws'. The modern terminology has 'theory' as the highest level of confidence in science.The fact is if it had been accepted as a law then it would not still be referred to as a theory by the scientific community. Which is why I think it is the most likely way life as evolved, but refuse to claim it as truth and so treat it with some scepticism.
I should point out that Newton's 'laws' are now known to be wrong. They were replaced by Einstein's *theory* of general relativity. NO idea in science is 'beyond all doubt'. It is *always* possible that some new data will come around that will require a change in our understanding."Scientific theories contain facts. Theory is as high as it gets in science. They NEVER get "proven" to become "laws"."
So Newtons theory on gravity never became Newtons Law on gravity? The fact is it started out as a theory and only when he had proven it beyond all doubt did it become Newton's law on gravity. Nobody as been able to do that with Darwin's theories on evolution which is why it remains a theory and not a law.
But what does NOT happen in science is regression. Once Ptolemy's ideas were shown to be wrong, they were not re-introduced when Newton's ideas were found to be wrong. And while Newton's ideas are used even today as very good *approximations*, the more correct version given by Einstein is used in those cases where more accuracy is required.
The idea of static species the common viewpoint about 250 years ago. Then people started looking into the evidence and realized that species do, in fact, change over geological time. THAT is evolution. What Darwin did is propose a *mechanism* for those changes and supplied evidence for that mechanism being relevant. It is quite possible that the details of this mechanism will be changed as we learn more. In fact, that has already happened when genetics was merge into evolutionary theory in the 'modern synthesis' of the 1950's.
First, scientific ideas start out as *hypotheses*, not theories. Second, there is *never* a proof beyond all doubt. That simply isn't possible. Third, Newton's 'laws' are now known to be only approximations. They are known to fail in many situations."Scientific theories contain facts. Theory is as high as it gets in science. They NEVER get "proven" to become "laws"."
"Like Newton's LAW of gravity."
Or are you still suffering under the delusion that Newton's theory on gravity started out as his law of gravity. The fact is anything in science starts out as a theory and only when it is proven beyond all doubt is it confirmed as a scientific law.
And it is partly because of the overthrow of Newton's ideas that modern scientists are reluctant to label anything as a 'law'. Except in very limited, rule-of-thumb situations, the word 'law' in science is rarely used.