[Timmy]

These threads are getting old. We keep getting a new guy who posts this silliness and starts the whole thing over again. Let me suggest this. When you evolutionists can present solid proof (not just some possible "evidence" or "just so" stories) of your theory, let us know. I mean, isn't that what science is supposed to do for "scientific facts?" Otherwise, please keep looking. If you would follow this advice, this place would be a lot quieter for all of us.

[longshadow]

When you evolutionists can present solid proof (not just some possible "evidence" or "just so" stories) of your theory, let us know. I mean, isn't that what science is supposed to do for "scientific facts?"

No, that is NOT what science is supposed to do.

Scientific theories can NEVER be "proven" in the sense that theorems in Mathematics are proven. That would require making EVERY possible observation and conducting EVERY possible experiment that could dis-prove the theory.

Scientific theories are "accepted" based upon their consonance with the existing body of data, AND their ability to accurately make useful, falsifiable predictions. A theory that is subjected to multiple broad attempts to falsify it, and which explains the phenomenon within it scope better than other theories is thus "accepted" by the consenus among the scientific community.

In short, proof has nothing to do with it. It is based on the preponderance of the evidence, and lack of dis-proof.