Trust is a relative thing when it comes to science. Science says do not believe a thing unless you have proven it for yourself. This is why most science classes are equipped laboratories. Don’t take the professor’s word that Chemical A mixed with Chemical B causes the concoction to bubble over, prove it for yourself so that you know that thing. Moreover, nobody “trusts” science explicitly, as you seem to suggest. That’s like saying many people today trust religion. Whoa, wait a minute. Which religion? You’re using far too broad a term.

Of course you should distrust science, as one should distrust all things. Everything in this world should be questioned, right down to our very existence. That’s when truth can be most revealed. Science, not religion, teaches distrust, not trust. It must teach questioning, not acceptance of stock answers in order for it to actually be science. It's for this reason that I find it amusing every time someone says evolution is religion.


I am religious. I don’t feel that science has ever once challenged my belief system. It strengthens it.


But all you’re doing when you say this is disregarding the entire field of science. You don’t deny gravity, do you?


It may be, yes. It wouldn’t be the first time it’s happened that humans have made mistakes. But it might also not be. Some theories stick and become provable fact, others don’t. Your logic suggests that anything that possesses any faults whatsoever should be thrown in the rubbish bin. Our computers which we communicate through are faulty. Should we discard them as well?

To get back to the purpose of this thread, I think the real statement is in the fact that, thus far, none of Linda’s statements here or in her other posts on the Evoultion/Creation forum have been even challenged. No one has even tried to prove her wrong. To me this says an awful lot.