Replies

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,

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.

As I stated, the cathode ray tube would have been impossible without Faraday's discoveries, nothing false about that statement.

I'll keep this as simple as I can. A CRT is an evacuated gas discharge tube. How did Faraday's theories in the 19th century result in the invention of the gas discharge tube in the 17th century?

(Is that your TARDIS buzzing in the background?)

Your statements are fuzzy - you are hiding behind a maze of continually shifting definitions. First the theory came before CRTs. But CRTs came first. No - Faraday came first with cathodes. How are cathodes the same as CRTs? and what of gas discharge tubes? Oh... those are mere toys.

Sands do not shift as much...

Are you aware that it was only recently that applied science has become the norm in engineering? That for the majority of recorded history, invention has preceeded BEFORE theory, and that theory played catch-up? It was thus with gas discharge tubes. Cannon and catapults were developed before the science of ballistics. Greek fire was used long before anyone could explain why it worked. DaVinci designed helicopters and airships a hundred years before Newton's gravity, and Watt and Newcomb built steam engines 40 years before Carnot's theory of engine efficiency. Your argument for the way science and invention progressed through history is simply wrong.