(January 8, 2016 at 6:01 pm)Quantum Wrote:(January 8, 2016 at 5:55 pm)drfuzzy Wrote:
LOL Kingpin! Let's call it a personal opinion. Actually, scientific method folks, help me out here . . . I would call a theory that has quite a bit of reliable data behind it valuable. Not unlike a wealth of circumstantial evidence in a court case. I would give quite a bit of credit to the possibility of the theory - but not claim that it has been proven.
That's kind of like my thoughts on the existence or non-existence of deities, Kingpin. And it's why I put it down as my signature. Give me proof, or yeah, it's just a theory. If it's a theory, how much data do you have behind it? I get to examine the data before deciding.
Now that was my usual ramble, but . . . did I make any sense, folks?
I'm afraid you can't prove science with science.
I think however that it boils down to a deliberate choice between having to accept solipsism or an external knowable reality.
I'm an external reality type o' gal, Quantum.
"The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children."- Albert Einstein