Actually I had not noticed your post. Nevertheless, it was proper to ignore it. It is the usual nonsense which evolutionists do of posting a lot of stuff that is true, but is absolutely not to the point being discussed. The post you were responding to, #1276 said:
For a supposed astronomer you do not even know your terms. It is called the LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION it is far more than a theory. As I told physicist, by denying something which you know to be true you are being dishonest. If you are a radio astronomer you know that gravity has been observed. If you do not know it, then you are not a radio astronomer, so either way you are being dishonest.
You and your friends are trying to create confusion in order to try to dismiss my posts as nonsense. Specifically that gravity has been observed and evolution never has been observed. I ask all those who do not believe that gravity has been observed or do not believe that it is observable to go on top of a 20 story building and jump. This will have two benefits: one it will prove to you that there are indeed universal scientific laws, and two, it will rid the world of a few people lacking in common sense (and perhaps win you a posthmous Darwin Award!). Gravity is observed everyday by everyone. Evolution has NEVER been observed.
BTW - it is interesting that evolutionists when shown that some scientific statement is true, try to challenge the truth of a scientific theory instead of prove their own evolutionary theory. It shows clearly to me that evolutionists are quite aware that evolution is not a fact, but just rhetorical nonsense.
Your dissertation does not address anything on the above. It is what I call confusionism. Trying to divert from the point of the discussion with irrelevancies. The point was, and both you and physicist should be ashamed to have denied it, that gravity is definitely and absolutely true and observable. The same cannot be said for the phony theory of evolution.
The fact that things fall down is not particularly illuminating. Things fell down for thousands of recorded human history, but only a few people attempted to quantify the motion, and only a handful have added significant insight into the phenomenon. But even after Galileo, Newton and Einstein, we still do not understand gravity, nor do we have a coherent set of equations to describe it.
The heart of your argument against evolution is that it is a "soft" science, full of speculation and theorizing.
You make a false dichotomy between soft and hard science. There is no such thing as a science that is free of speculation. There is no such thing as a science that has established, definitive laws. All scientific laws are just the current best fit to data. None of them yet show the signiture of the creator, regardless of how cool they might seem. They are all flawed constructs, constantly being tinkered with and modified.
Aren't you tired of posting your typical swill? By now you should have realized that your continued disingenuous attacks against highly-degreed individuals will not reinflate your sadly collapsed and tattered ego. RadioAstronomer in post 1303 and others have attempted once again to define terms in simple language so that even YOU can understand what is being said. The only error RadioAstronomer made was to invest his time and effort in a futile attempt to educate you.
BTW, when will you finally admit that a circle is in fact an ellipse? Or perhaps we should try something simpler...what is the age of the Earth? PatrickHenry, I and many others continue to await your vast knowledge and expertise.