@g-man,
g-man;57392 wrote:1. That is simply "my" opinion as to what belief in these theories amounts to.
Science has the burden of providing a proof that is undeniable to make it anything other than consensus based theory. I am sorry if that fact offends you.
The fact that I did venture into the realm of evolution is quite meaningless.
The evidences provided by fossil record leave much to the imagination and are not proven. I'm sure that will infuriate you too. But, like it or not, science has not adequately proven these issues to deserve the right to dismiss skeptics as morons and idiots.
Science has no such burden. You again misunderstand. Science does one thing: uncover facts. That's it.
Please show me these "evidences" you speak of. I will be glad to clarify them.
Once again missing the point... theories aren't proven or disproven. They are changed to reflect facts as they are found. Thus they are the most accurate answers available.
Also have you thought of looking outside of the fossil record? Genetics perhaps? That entire field of science confirmed the predictions made by evolutionary theory. Genome sequencing has been of a GREAT help, leading to a lot of questions being answered.
Your lack of how science works doesn't offend me whatsoever. It's a bit disappointing, but not offensive.
Ever seen the churches with ATMs? Ever heard of the "700 Club"?
[UOTE]3. Everything. Taxpayers should not be paying for an activity that is judge as a success by the people who conduct the studies. They make all the rules. And provide no return. They do pat themselves on the back a lot.[/QUOTE]
Fail once again. The people who conduct the studies are NOT the judges of their success. Here's a little tidbit for ya that ought to clear things up: Richard Sternberg, a professor who was "expelled" (and included in the movie of the same name) was removed because he unethically circumvented the peer review system, putting a paper in sci-journal without the same review that all theories receive (this includes evolution BTW).
Unethically. That word has a kind of a sting to it. Kind of a "Judge as a success by the people who conduct the studies" sting. Like patting oneself on the back.
Unethically.
Quote:4. And expect to be paid for it.
Isn't that what you do in a "career"?
Quote:5. Unimpressed. I'm assuming at this point that I've impressed upon you that I consider any science other than medical and technical are pointless and a waste of money.
You've impressed upon me a total lack of knowledge about science and the scientific method. That's about it. It's the only reason you'd insult the scientific community like that.
Quote:6. Not true. The list is made up of relevant items.
I have no qualms about doing away with a tax paid education process.
It is proven to be absurd and a failure.
That list is made up of theories on the same level as evolution. You're trying to backtrack... "all theories that are unproven" you said, correct?
Just as a quick example: Show me the force that is gravity. What property of mass gives it a gravitational pull? Have you seen a graviton or a gravity wave? How do you know that gravity is "proven" as you say? If that were so, we'd have flying cars, hoverboards and artificial gravity in space.
And by this very same logic, I should be able to "teach the controversy" about "Intelligent Gravitation" whereby an intelligent agency uses invisible hands to push things down.
So once again... "all unproven theories"?
