[b_sharp]

"IMO, atomic theory has far more veracity than evolutionsm, simply due to the fact that it works with ongoing phenomena upon which it is able to operate with further observation and testing.

What is observed in atomic theory, which by the way is part of quantum theory, is the effect of the structure of the atom. There is no direct observation made.

"As such I do consider it to be science. Atomic theory, like the discipline of biology, is uncovering the grand design God placed into His creation and sustains to this very moment. In case you haven't noticed, 4.5 billion years is water over the dam."

Glad you acknowledge the age of the Earth.

"The farthest back written records of history go - our only hope for eyewitness testimony - is several millenia. "

'Eyewitness testimony' as recorded millenia after the putative fact. 'Eyewitness testimony' that can be and has been shown inaccurate. 'Eyewitness testimony', the origin of which has indeterminate credibility.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"The farthest back written records of history go - our only hope for eyewitness testimony - is several millenia. "
(FC)

'Eyewitness testimony' as recorded millenia after the putative fact. 'Eyewitness testimony' that can be and has been shown inaccurate. 'Eyewitness testimony', the origin of which has indeterminate credibility.
(B-Sharp)


Just like the eyewitness testimony of the Bible. Uncle Fester has no trouble though accepting THAT unquestioningly.
Very telling

[Fester Chugabrew]

There is no direct observation made.

Inasmuch as atomic theory makes use of materials and phenomena presently at hand it is indeed making use of direct observation.

Eyewitness testimony is by no means infallible, but it sure beats none at all. A 4.5 billion year old earth does not enjoy as much, and as such it not a factor in science, but a factor in a philosophy certain folks choose to follow.

Too bad. So sad. Take your philosphy down the hall and preach it.