Vanity ping.
Needs work.
But I think we need more discussion of the term "speculation" for the edification of a certain few of the Anti-science crowd.
Off the top of my head, I would say that all scientists speculate to some degree and many discuss, and some even publish, such thoughts (particularly to get some quick and easy feedback). However, such speculations are not indicative of beliefs held, not intended to indicate a direction for future research, but to simply to explore an idea, no matter how off-the-wall it may be, and see if any fruitful insights are realized. OTOH, some of it is intended to be read with tongue firmly in cheek. And most of the thumpers can't seem to tell the difference.
I don't have any problem with C-man's definitions nor do I with your additions. I suggest that at the start of any Crevo thread this be posted along with the ping list. Then we can conviently refer back to that post when necessary.
But as The_Victor has pointed out, how do you get the anti-evo's to agree to it?
Good Luck
Here is a really good read that I think is germaane to this topic.
http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/sciman0d.pdf/$file/sciman0d.pdf
Sorry for not being on more all. :-(
Sigh.