My original argument was that science couldn't provide "proofs", only evidence. My reasoning being that theories being based on observations, they don't generally describe affects that have not yet been observed. There are some glaring exceptions, but time will tell.
I used television as an example of a physical affect where the CRT was invented 50 years before electrons were discovered when gore3000 declared that the CRT was delevoped according to Faraday's theories on electromagnetic induction and electrolysis, although he didn't seem to know what those were. At which point I referred him to the history of the gas discharge tube and Jean Picard's work in the late 1600's and asked how a theory espoused (love that word) in the 1800's generated a device in the 1600's. At this point he bailed and lost track of my 000's.
I'm thinking maybe gore3000 isn't an algorithm like longshadow thinks, he might be a timelord and can't keep track of when he is. Possibly he's in his last re-generation and his mind is failing him.
As I stated, the cathode ray tube would have been impossible without Faraday's discoveries, nothing false about that statement. As I also stated, in 1855 it was a totally worthless toy. Not until after the theory behind it, not until many experiments were conducted, and not after much work was done, did it become a practical application and one was able to use it for it what meant for, watching "I love Lucy". That serendipitous discoveries can be made, no one can deny, and I do not. That those discoveries only produce toys until the theory is formulated and understood is the point I made and you have not disproven it.
It is quite interesting that evolutionists, who call themselves scientists, constantly try to attack and demean the methods of science.
Fact of the matter is that we would have no atom bomb without the theory of relativity, we would no tv without Faraday's numerous discoveries. Science builds upon previous discoveries to produce new ones. The know-nothing attitude expressed by you is an insult to the great advances real science has accomplished. The proofs of real science are all around us, from tv's to airplanes to automobiles, to medicine. Each one uses the discoveries, experiments, theories of a hundreds, thousands, and perhaps even millions of scientists who came before. And what is most important each one of these new applications give renewed proof of the scientific theories, the scientific experiments done to test them and the truths of science.
Evolution of course, not being a science, cannot do any of the above.