Another evasive reply, why is this such a difficult question for you?
Let me try this then, is any of your current knowledge about science based in any way on any books? if so can you give us a concrete example of something like some knowledge you may have of chemistry, physics, biology? give me some examples of some things in science that you learned from books?
I can give you hundreds because I've read hundreds of books, for example the resonant frequency of an L/C parallel tuned circuit (I read this in a book) or the fact that the field equations in general relativity are non-linear partial differential equations (I read that in a book), so what about you?
You have read a book before, I take it?
Yes, in order to assert X is emphatically true one needs to establish that any and all sources used in that assertion are also 100% reliable and trustworthy, this is not controversial David, this is all very obvious.
You could try answering my question instead of trying to imply my question is unreasonable, inappropriate.
There is no scientific debate about the fundamentals of evolution. Life evolves; species descend with modifications from other species. However, fewer than 50% of American adults know that humans developed from earlier species. The fact of evolution is seen by some as a threat to personal worldviews. Added to this social controversy is a general lack of understanding about what evolution is and how it works. Together, these factors can make it challenging for teachers to present the science honestly, accurately, and completely. NCSE is committed to helping teachers gain the confidence and support they need to teach evolution effectively.
I certainly have never suggested we cannot learn anything given the risk of sources being unreliable, that is not my thesis here. What is my thesis then? it is that you do inherently, implicitly and frequently argue from authority, I've pretty much proven this now as is evidenced by your fear of answering my questions honestly.
I'm afraid you are quite wrong here David, I understand that every theory whether it be scientific of otherwise is always based on axioms, postulates - I did ask you to tell me what you understand by these terms but as is your custom you refuse to tell me.
Evolution is not a fact, I am prepared to debate that with anyone here, I tried debating it with you but when certain questions arise naturally from this you refuse to answer so any debate is dead in the water because you afraid of being exposed as wrong.
Everything I've said to you so far about this is correct David, it is the basis of scientific, reasoned inquiry, any conclusions or claims that arise from any theory are only as reliable as the sources, axioms, postulates that the theory rests upon.
