Dear Lord, give me strength! He has an observation; he has a hypothesis to explain that observation; he's going to do research to see if his hypothesis is correct or if he needs to modify it. That is science, but you wouldn't know that, would you, Mr. "A circle is not an ellipse, the planet's have wildly elliptical orbits, 'strong evidence' equals 'absolute proof,' and 1720 is a really big number."
Actually, now your misrepresentations of science make a lot of sense. You consider science like a religion -- complete and not in need of constant revision. The fact that researchers are constantly doing research is an insult to your sensibilities -- they should "know" the answers already.
Exactly what I said. Right now it is an ASSUMPTION. When he finds proof for that assumption, get back to me. He will not. The scientific facts both these scientists under discussion discovered show the impossibility of evolution.