[Revolutionary]

Evolution doesn't even rate as a theory. The scientific problem is that they have nothing to fill the hole if they disavow evolution. Scientists always want another theory to replace the previous theory. Otherwise they will stubbornly cling to a failed notion for decades.

Intelligent design is still in its infancy as a potential replacement. If were pursued as rabidly as evolution, they would be able to fill it out. It also is fighting a political war at the same time. This makes it doubly tough.

Terra-forming might be a way around the problem. By funding the science of Terra-forming, the picture would become clearer at each step. By making the scientific community the intelligent designers, you get around the political problem. If they figure out what I have so far, they will marvel at the combination of elegant simplicity and complexity in the same design. They would see where they could let the process run and the points at which they would have to intervene to move to the next level. They would see many of the same collection of methodologies repeated over and over in different situations. Eventually this would lead to a new "theory" or theories of how things work (more likely the later).

[balrog666]

Are you retarded or is this your standard level of (in)competence?

[Dimensio]

Evolution doesn't even rate as a theory.

Please explain why you believe that the theory of evolution is not actually a theory.

The scientific problem is that they have nothing to fill the hole if they disavow evolution. Scientists always want another theory to replace the previous theory.

The scientific response to a disproven theory where no alternative explanation exists is to consider the answer "unknown".

Otherwise they will stubbornly cling to a failed notion for decades.

Please demonstrate that the theory of evolution is a "failed notion".

Intelligent design is still in its infancy as a potential replacement.

If by "infancy" you mean that there exists no evidence in favor of it, then this is correct.

If were pursued as rabidly as evolution, they would be able to fill it out.

Then it is unfortunate that advocates for "intelligent design" do no actual research to 'pursue' their claims.

It also is fighting a political war at the same time. This makes it doubly tough.

This is the fault of those who promote it for choosing to treat science as though it were a political battle rather than actually doing research to support their claims of "intelligent design".

Terra-forming might be a way around the problem. By funding the science of Terra-forming, the picture would become clearer at each step

I fail to see how terraforming would affect the study of the theory of evolution or the claims of intelligent design.

By making the scientific community the intelligent designers, you get around the political problem

I fail to see how this relates to the current subject.

If they figure out what I have so far, they will marvel at the combination of elegant simplicity and complexity in the same design. They would see where they could let the process run and the points at which they would have to intervene to move to the next level. They would see many of the same collection of methodologies repeated over and over in different situations. Eventually this would lead to a new "theory" or theories of how things work (more likely the later).

It appears that you believe that others will find this claim compelling, but you have offered no explanation. Please state your claims more clearly.