[Diamond]

He says, "“What I’m trying to do is deal with pseudoscience regardless of where it’s coming from.” Good luck. Establishing demaraction criteria for science is something philosophers of science have been unable to agree upon, notwithstanding the plethora of reflexive assurances to the contrary of Darwinians here.

Cordially,

[Varda]

"Establishing demaraction criteria for science is something philosophers of science have been unable to agree upon"

I agree but not all those philosophical battles are in play among practicing scientists. For instance I haven't met a scientist that doesn't believe in objective reality or that the object of inquiry in modern science is material existence, or that science doesn't seek proof but rather evidence, etc. I'd like to see how and why these ideas have been formulated before looking at how they've come to be applied.