Pete.. you use your personal concept of the notion of 'proof' like a bludgeon. The way you use it, almost nothing beyond pure mathematics can be definitely 'proven'. Various sorts of data gathered by science are evidence in a never ending search for better understanding. Rejecting a pretty clear set of data that conflict with your belief system because they don't adhere to your narrow idea of proof is just that... narrow and personal. I don't know any other way to say it. Steve is pretty blunt... but his basic understanding of science is the same as mine... and of 98+% of all scientists. Believe what you wish, but coming up with rhetorical ways to refute science is not going to wash. **Further, deponent sayeth not**
|