[DiogenesLamp]

I could hardly ask for a better demo. I point out the vast difference between how your theory did in real court versus in your imagination, and you respond by playing judge-of-the-judge. The judge’s opinion matters in in reality. Your opinion of his opinion matters inside your own head.

You are the one having trouble with reality. In REALITY, the Judge is WRONG. Rather than admit the judge is wrong, you point out that an Idiot with power can enforce his decisions, a philosophy more commonly known as "might makes right."

This is why Science is superior to Law. In Science, nobody respects a declaration just because it was made by someone in authority. It must stand on it's own feet, or it is invalid. This is known as "TRUTH."

[BladeBryan]

DiogenesLamp wrote: “This is why Science is superior to Law. In Science, nobody respects a declaration just because it was made by someone in authority. It must stand on it’s own feet, or it is invalid.”

Unless you have some laboratory experiment to reproduce Article II section 1, the issue is law not science. Legal theories meet their test in court, and yours could hardly be doing worse.