Kind of a weird statement there Ace.
Of course study what we know, but what does "pronounces judgment of what we don't know" mean?
Can't we theorize and speculate about what we don't know, what lies beyond our knowledge or should we just stop, stick out our chest out and say, *that's all that needs to be known about a particular subject, nothing new need be added*.
As Windflier said about those two crackpots, the Wright brothers and I might add, Einstein, Galileo Galilei, Columbus and a host of others who went against the orthodoxy of their time.
I think the recently deceased Halton Arp belongs in that category also.
All *different* ideas and viewpoints are not all crackpottery, most may be and will be proven as such, but a few make the grade of advancing knowledge.
Loosen up Ace, you're wound up too tight, plus you seem rather *thick* in understanding what we are really saying.
I'm no expert on paleontology, just interested in the subject, don't think you're an expert either from reading the two little books you keep harping about.
“Can’t we theorize and speculate about what we don’t know...?”
Sure, speculate all you wish, nothing wrong with that.
But in this particular case, your uninformed speculations could be hugely improved if you bother to crack a book or two and study their lessons.
There you would discover which questions have been already answered, which are being worked on, and which can have no answers.
“...don’t think you’re an expert either from reading those two little books you keep harping about”.
I have merely pointed to places where you can BEGIN your woefully defective education, FRiend.