Who'se really going to argue against the idea that science as it is, is prejudiced towards describing in terms of cause and effect?
No one, because it's not even a defensible hypothesis. What's to argue?
This is pretty much your standard procedure, Sy. You make a wild statement about science getting it all wrong. You then fail to produce even a sliver of evidence to support your radical new idea about how science should be practiced, while at the same time proclaiming that the lack of evidence is exactly what supports your statement.
It's like watching a conspiracy theorist in action. "The Warren Commission covered up the fact that
aliens killed JFK! Where's my proof? Well, you don't see any mention of aliens in the Warren Report, do you?"
Mind you, I don't mean any of this as an insult. I
love conspiracy theorists. I hope this time you tell us how the Illuminati snake demons have infiltrated the highest levels of the scientific community to further their own agenda.
*grabs popcorn, gets comfy*
™ Version 4.2
