> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:31:28 -0500, "David L. Burkhead"
>
sff.net> wrote:
>>>Please don't try to talk about what's "Scientific" and what isn't, that
>>constitutes scientific evidence and what doesn't. Every time you do so,
you
>>get it wrong.
>>
>>Some examples:
>
Hal's mind is made up. Don't confuse him with facts.
> My nominations for the most pendantic bullshit post of the week.
My nomination for the most content-free comeback of the week.
> Um, David, me thinks you have way too much spare time on your hands.
Um, Hal, methinks you have way too much hands on your time.
> Did you have a question somewhere in all that?
No, actually. Never said I did.
> What is it exactly
> that you don't understand?
The problem isn't that I don't understand--the problem is that I do.
Renli's statements about science and what makes a scientific theory are
just plain wrong. Examples drawn from actual science demonstrate the
difference between what he is claiming and how science actually works.
--
David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
mailto:dburkhead@
sff.net "While we live, let us live."
My webcomic Cold Servings
http://www.coldservings.com -- Back from hiatus!
Updates Wednesdays
