The one eternal characteristic of ignorance is absolute certainty, and absolute certainty does violence both to truth and to science.
Anything that can be said has been said or will be said, asterisks notwithstanding.
"Foundational" will come as a huge surprise to Galen, Aristotle, Mendel and Linnaeus.
Incidentally, one of the essential foundations of science is independent repeatability. Copping out with "eons" and "epochs" and other BS does not invalidate this simple requirement. There is no "science" of evolution among true scientists.
But what the heck; start calling it the "science" of evolution, "foundational", blah blah blah... and see how much traction it gets.
Very true. That's why the science of evolutionary biology is open to revision in light of new evidence, and it has undergone many revisions over the last 150 years. Our understanding of it is constantly being refined as new discoveries are made. There is no "absolute certainty."
"Foundational" will come as a huge surprise to Galen, Aristotle, Mendel and Linnaeus.
No surprise there, given that all of them were dead before most of the important discoveries of modern biology were made.
Incidentally, one of the essential foundations of science is independent repeatability. Copping out with "eons" and "epochs" and other BS does not invalidate this simple requirement.
You obviously don't understand what repeatability means in the context of science. It refers to the experiments and/or observations used to test scientific theories. Genetic experiments that support evolution are repeatable. Fossils can be repeatedly observed to confirm the claims and/or inferences of paleotologists.
Repeatability does not mean that the actual event being studied has to be repeated. Forensic scientists don't repeat the murders they investigate. Vulcanologists studying Mt. St. Helens don't repeat the erruption.
There is no "science" of evolution among true scientists.
Gee, so that means the 99.9% of the scientists aren't "true scientists."