Well, I guess it shouldn't surprise me to see that the thread has evolved (evolved!), or maybe more accurately DEvolved into a "religion v science" argument and the usual personal attacks. Not exactly what I was thinking when I launched it. For a refresher, here is the first post:

"OK, so many people "don't believe in" science. But science is a process and not a belief system. So, if you don't accept the scientific method as a process for gaining new knowledge, please describe your own alternative process for discovery that stands up to scrutiny by impartial parties (of any religion) and yields reproducible results. Please explain how this process works. Step by step.

Please also explain why the scientific method *doesn't work* since your process is obviously the "right" one. And show examples of how it has worked in real life and how we can use this process ourselves to make new discoveries."

I still haven't heard why the scientific method of inquiry is a flawed process or what alternative there might be that is equally (or more??) useful and valid. Yes, it was a challenge. I haven't seen anyone rise to it.

Saul