Bad science?

Because the term "law" isn't used any more is the biggest reason. It is an old fashioned term.In addition, if you look at what we do call laws, they are more focussed and much, much less encompassing than modern theories are.Newton had his "laws" of motion (actually without any real "theory" explicitly stated). They are simply equations describing the way bodies move. Einstein has his equations describing the same thing but they are not called laws they are embedded in the two theories of relativity and the theories make broader statments than just those equations. We will probably never call the equations of relativity "laws" even though they are more accurate than Newton's equations.I suppose one could liken some population genetics equations to Newton's laws of motion and call them population "laws" but, as noted, that isn't done any more. The theory itself if much more encompassing than any such details anyway.

Yea, yea we've heard this dozens of times. Now just open a thread that presents some detailed evidence, discusses the consensus scientific position on this and then offers a consistent, complete altenative. This is what scientists do when they disagree with an interpretation.We ask this everytime some brings up the "interpretation" thing. It isn't answered at all well. Usuall bare assertions with no reasoning given. I presume you are going to do better?

Once again, open a thread, show the evidence and then show a coherent different interpretation. Otherwise it would be appropriate to shut up.Edited by NosyNed, : chose a better word