Bingo! By Jove, I think he's got it! Oh wait, the rest of his post proves that any insight was purely a fleeting thing. Okay, now g3k, you've finally understood, after how many months, that scientific frameworks are built upon observation -- but the kicker is, those observations can be used to predict things that cannot be observed, such as the prediction that no dinosaur ever had mammary glands (where's Dr. Demento when you need him?). That, my boy, is science.
Sometimes I get the impression I'm arguing with a 14-year-old.
No it cannot - as I have shown with the platypus. If the platypus had never been found everyone would have thought it was a live birthing animal. The reason why live birthing is not included in the list of essential mammalian characteristics is the platypus. Also none of the unique features of the platypus would have been predicted by your phony paleontological science.
In addition, this paleontological "science" contradicts your evolutionary theory of gradual change of species. There is no reason why totally unrelated characteristics should have evolved together at the same time. It is totally ridiculous to say such a thing.