@Frank Apisa,
Quote:That is a story, Neo...almost certainly a myth.
"Almost certainly" eh?? Blimey!! That concedes the whole case.
Not wishing to be blurting assertions. which I know is the polite way of going about things around here, I will provide the reason.
If it is not certain, the "almost" might easily embrace 80% of certainty. If one was climbing a ladder with 100 rungs carrying a hod full of bricks one might easily feel that on the 80th rung one was "almost" there. Even 70% is not being too pedantic. 51% would be pedantic.
In which case there is no game to play other than a rhetorical competition in which practical advantages are a test of which rhetoric is chosen. In the long run I mean. A revolution occurring when the settled rhetoric no longer fits the case. Although a fair amount of it is likely to be carried on with after the revolution.
And your rhetoric, such as it is, like playing the same note repetitively, is a dead loss on the empirical evidence which stares you in the face. The suck it and see method of science. Your rhetoric is not chosen. As a fact. The reason is that it has no practical advantages for society whatever advantages it has to you. If it had I feel sure you would not be slow to mention them.
A rhetorical position embracing "almost" is nowhere. It's as safe as a baby strapped in a pram being wheeled around Hyde Park on a warm, sunny day by the assistant nanny. Gurgling at passers by.
