"Of course. But when it comes to the common man, he must reply upon, i.e. trust, what is reported to him. Right?"
No! Wrong! That was my point a few posts back! Sorry for the excessive exclamation points, but...the point is that no one has to take science on faith or trust. It's all out there to be learned for yourself if you really feel the need.
Of course not. But how many people do? Or, to put it another way, have you searched out, tested, and personally verified every scientific proposition placed into your hearing? Do you know anyone who does?
I am not saying what one must "do" in order to have any certitude over common facts. I am saying that commonly accepted facts are often taken on the faith that the reporter is honest. If it isn't your own reason and senses taking the measurement and doing the experiment, then you are relying upon the research of someone else. I reckon in most cases that research has been properly done.
But when someone posits a billion year old earth as a "scientific fact", I must ask, how many untestable assumptions were made before coming to that conclusion? When they insist their version of history is the only one worthy of acceptation in the classroom I must ask, "Who died and made you God?"
It has become clear to me over the past few years: Dogmatic evolutionists do not like questions.