[WildTurkey]

Incorrect. I'm explaining (above) that a directly observed fact in the lab or in the wild is closer to the truth than merely postulating a theory.

Here we go AGAIN! You don't postulate a theory. You postulate a hypothesis and then a hypothesis becomes a theory AFTER substantial observations verify the validity of the hypothesis.

[NJ Neocon]

Incorrect. I'm explaining (above) that a directly observed fact in the lab or in the wild is closer to the truth than merely postulating a theory.

Oh for the love of...Hypothesis are postulated...NOT theories!

Theories are solid representations backed by numerous evidence and observations.

[Southack]

"Here we go AGAIN! You don't postulate a theory. You postulate a hypothesis and then a hypothesis becomes a theory AFTER substantial observations verify the validity of the hypothesis."

No, it's not "here we go again." You've failed to comprehend to what I replied.

The claim was that *theory* was the closest possible thing to the truth. I corrected the poster by pointing out that reality, actual observations of facts in the wild and in the lab, is/are much closer to the truth than mere postulations of a theory to an audience, no matter how well thought said theory may be.

Thus, the observations of the truth, when accurate, are considered more precise than theoritical ramblings.