GD> SK> We should be teaching the DEFINITION of what Science IS in
GD> SK> schools!

GD>The problem is that they are trying to re-define what science is.  

Of course.

.....
GD> SK> Nah, the Creation "Scientists" would then simply CREATE a new
GD> SK> scientific  method. Something like "If you can't explain
GD> SK> it...GODDUNIT!". 

GD>See above.  They are under the impression that science is a 
GD>democratic process and that the truth can be legislated 
GD>into law.  They use the wrong meaning of what a theory is 

Kinda like how some people HERE redefine what a negative is. ;)

GD>and claim "it's only a theory".  It doesn't matter that there 
GD>are years, even hundreds and thousands of years of testing 
GD>and confirmation to support a theory.  

Yep. They think a solid theory is but a "guess". 
They obviously don't know of "hypothesis".

GD>As to the deomocratic part, it is sufficient for them to find a 
GD>single scientist to even slighlty disagree with a situation 
GD>for them to say, "All the science isn't in.  We'll have to 
GD>wait until it's been proven beyound a shadow of a doubt."  

Well, unless it's THIER argument in question.

X CMPQwk 1.42 16554 XWhat would jesusonacid do?

--- Maximus/2 3.01