Jeri

Snail, Peace has a habit of playing devil's advocate.

I don't have a problem with that, I would just like the right to reply.

Try to find the 'preposterous statements' he made, and you'll find questions only. Your mind turned them into statements. If something doesn't make sense to you, it might just be because you got it wrong.

Peace

some science is based on belief, too

No it isn't. I've already gone over this.

All triangles have 180 degrees (interior angles). That holds true until someone draws a triangle on a globe, and then it has 270 degrees. Then someone defines triangle as figure drawn on a flat surface, as if such a thing is at all possible in a universe that is curved. Even flat surfaces aren't flat.

Triangles and flat surfaces are theoretical concepts. Whether either of them can be constructed in the real universe is entirely irrelevant.

They have each lied to protect their respective 'positions of authority'. Remember the "Rule of 48".

Nobody lied. They got it wrong. It was put right. No 'positions of authority' or vested interests were at stake.

However, granted when you said that science tends to correct its mistakes once they find them. But I still don't trust either religions or science. Too many vested interests--in both.

I've already dealt with "tends". Peace is right not to trust the institutions of science or, at least, to hold them up to scrutiny. That is not the same thing as mistrusting science.

People who worship at the altar of science are not much different from people who worship at the altars of religions.

Oh, come ON! That is a declaration of personal prejudice not a rational statement.

why DO we develop/do bad stuff-whether in the name of science or the name of religion?

Individual scientists may 'develop/do bad stuff' because they are greedy, idealistic, patriotic or just plain nasty human beings. I don't think anybody does it 'in the name of science'.

In fact, I am very much supportive of the scientific method.

I'm sorry but the statements above show that Peace doesn't really understand the scientific method.

Good scientists explore possibilities of the physical reality by/with which we are surrounded.

At last, something we can agree on but they cannot choose what they are going to find before they find it. Physical reality is what it is.

Why has Tesla been marginalized by main-stream science?

Surely Peace was throwing down a challenge here. He quoted the Colorado Springs Independant. I quoted Wikipedia, the Public Broadcasting Service and the Tesla Memorial Society of New York.
In response I got -

Go stalk someone else, Snail. I have nothing to say to you. Not today, not tomorrow, not ever again.

I think science matters. Am I not allowed to say so?

(Oh bugger! I've descended into a cut-N-paste war.)