[betty boop]

Please forgive my tendency to view every bit of scientific knowledge in light of the geometry. But truly, I see these laws like Newtonian physics - faithful at the classical level but not so much at either the quantum or the larger hypercube of space/time.

I definitely share the tendency! Much of science today, and all of Darwinism, is still on Newton's "classical model."... For instance, did you know that NASA's "official position" on evolution today is classical Darwinism (i.e., RM+NS)? I only found out about this recently, and was quite surprised.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your reply and understanding!

Much of science today, and all of Darwinism, is still on Newton's "classical model."...

Indeed. That seems so backwards considering the breakneck pace of physics and math. Jeepers...

For instance, did you know that NASA's "official position" on evolution today is classical Darwinism (i.e., RM+NS)? I only found out about this recently, and was quite surprised.

Since NASA is a government bureaucracy - and bureaucracies measure performance by budget appropriations rather than competition – we ought to cut them a little slack as they come up to speed this next century. LOL!

Of a truth, it would probably do more to advance science and reduce costs if NASA went head-to-head with China on a vital technology contest – like it did “way back when” against Russia to get a man on the moon.