Either answer my question or stop posting to me. You mad an assertion that science couldn't deal with historical events or things that were not witnessed and which cannot be reproduced experimentally.
I asked you whether it is permissible to execute people based on forensic evidence alone, with no witnesses to a crime.
How about you clarify your question. When you say "permissible" in what context do you mean? Permissible according to our judicial system? My conscience? A determination of absolute truth?
Our judicial system is based on the recognition that there will always be doubt and that claims made in the name of forensics are fallible.
Consider the evolution of the Indo-European language family. This has been accepted by all linguists for something like 50 yerars longer than biogical evolution.
The reasons for accepting the theory are basically that there are similar words with similar meanings in all the various branches, and various rules that connect the sounds of one to those of another. See, eg here or here.
The interesting thing is that this was done entirely by people, but in most cases there is no record of what was happening. Somehow, a single language, over the course of a few thousand years, split into things as different as English, Russian, French, Hindi, Albanian, Farsi, Armenian, Greek, and so forth, and at every step along the way, there was a coherent language
This is rather like animals gradually changing, while at every step still being perfectly functional
< ID/crreationism mode> Yeah, right, I can just imagine 1/2 Armenian, 1/2 English.
Or, I studied Russian in school, and I can tell you it's not like English!
< />
Clearly, the evolution of PIE cannot be reproduced in a lab, or directly observed (there are ancient written records in a few of the languages, but the written record is totally missing before about 3000 years ago, and is very recent for many of the languages).
Should we alloow this to be taught in schools? Why or why not?