| nightsurge said: What are your thoughts on the accepted fact that science does not PROVE anything? Even my world renowned college biology and chemistry professors would start out their semesters with that tid-bit of information. |
This is correct.
At best science deals in probabilities based on evidence and research. In this case the study of life and undertsanding how it develops and why there is such diversity. The leading theory for the past century has been evolution via natural selection. The probability of it being a law edges up in percentages every year as more evidence pours in all around the world from studies. I would say we are in the 90%+ probability range because of things such as fossill record, mapping of DNA and observations of various forms of life.
The issue is when a counter theory has 0% evidence. Nothing presented that can be replicated. That theory should be not be given the same level of acceptance and respect within any scientific community. If tommorow someone actually demonstrated a new understanding of reality and life then we should pursue it with greta ferver.
In summation, I agree with th enotion to always experiement and push boundaries of human understanding. However, to accept things simply due to human desire is counter to scientific progress. It should always equal and objective in its standards.
