This statement is an appeal to authority and, therefore, inherently illogical as proof of anything:
"Not according to a handful of sciences that accept evolution as a fact."
You believe a lot of people are "duped" about God. Many intelligent and accomplished people as well. Either way it's logically irrelevant as it does not and cannot change what the scientific method requires to prove something:
"How have so many scientists been duped about the meaning and processes of science? "
Your BELIEF as to what science is concerned with is irrelevant. There is the scientific method to prove something. Either you have proven something via scientific method or you have not. It's very cut and dry. Your BELIEFS do not change that fact:
"Science is -never- concerned with absolute truth. Science is concerned with what is most likely, or 'functionally true.' This is true whether you're testing the observable or unobservable."
This is correct:
"The only place where you get literal 'proofs' is mathematics. In science you have a hypothesis which must be tested against, in a manner such that the results might falsify it. If it is not falsified, then it must be tested again. "
Where YOU are confused is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to repeatedly test evolution from specie to specie. As a result, it is scientifically IMPOSSIBLE to prove specie to specie evolution. Similarly, it is IMPOSSIBLE to scientifically prove the big bang.
Is it likely? Sure. I admit that. As I told you previously, I even BELIEVE in both. But I recognize it for what it is, because I am intellectually honest: they are BELIEFS. They are not based in scientifically proven fact.
Your BELIEF in evolution as a scientifically proven FACT is a religious belief because it is NOT scientifically proven FACT nor is it scientifically provable.
It may be "scientifically" probable. But probability is not provability. You need to be as intellectually honest as you claim to be.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: