re: #782 reason0911

there is no educating occurring here. Just ad hominem attacks because I’m detracting from what I guess is the standard line.

No on the contrary. I am very happy to educate you. Which particular claim of Robinson’s do you wish me to discuss?

As to science having a standard line well, it goes something like this:

It is important to note that nowhere in the definition of science is there any room for democracy, personal preference or being “even handed” with the other side. In a scientific debate, once sufficient data comes in, there is always a winner and a loser.

Amongst professional scientists, these debates generally take two forms. Firstly, “does this really mean what you think it means?” Secondly, “did you really see what you think you saw?” Once those debates are settled, you have clarity. Both debates are closed by more data and/or better analysis. Eventually, the evidence mounts and consensus is reached. An open debate implies that there is, as yet, insufficient data, incomplete analysis or both. The final word always goes to the physical evidence itself. There is no “second place.” This is as it should be. Good scientists do not say that the universe is some way that it isn’t to please anyone, ever.