Should Atomic Theory be replaced (or taught side-by-side) with "Intelligent Very Small Dots"?

Question

After all, it's only a theory.

Answer 1

Or we could just not study at all, have no schools or jobs, and live like cavemen again. It would make life much easier. I'd start a tribe and hunt down caribou and deer.

Answer 2

Sure. Maybe the Theory of Plate Tectonics should be replaced with "Intelligent Very Large Rocks".

Answer 3

Sure why not.

One hunch is as good as the next.

You do realize ONE view of atomic theory is based on ONE DIMENSIONAL STRINGS 35 Newtons in size. And that they virbrate.

Can you draw a one dimensional object!

Please, draw one on the blackboard for me, I'd like to see it and if you do I'll introduce you to God so you can see him!

Do we have a deal. I'll invite you over for dinner to meet God, all YOU have to do is draw something on the blackboard that has LENGTH but not height, has WIDTH but not length.

You can try drawing time.

Or maybe one of the other 20 dimensions the postualate carries such as D-brain manifolds that fold back on themselves.

This is stuff that teach at MIT, you know!

You pay $15 grand a year to learn all this stuff!

And then you get $100,000 grants from Government and Industry to try and Falseify it. Popperian logic.

What a neat scam science is!

Answer 4

If we have as much verifiable information about intelligent very small dots as about atoms, we could teach one or the other. It would not matter. For example, you could teach someone where a certain city is either by showing it to them on a map or by taking them there. Either way, it is the same city in the same geographical location. I would not say that map information is false simply because going there is much more convincing.

Answer 5

Does "Intelligent Very Small Dots" have 800 Doctorate and Masters level researchers signing public statements to support it? Does it have 90% of geneticists and >50% of microbiologists supporting it? Does "Intelligent Very Small Dots" have demonstrable proofs that terrify their opposition into silencing them because they know they cannot withstand it in an open scientific debate?

If the answer to all of these questions is yes, then Yes! I'm willing to publically discuss and examine "Intelligent Very Small Dots". My science is open minded.

What's your reason for not discussing Intelligent Design (besides belief in your chosen religion of evolution)?

Ahhh GeneJohn...you do know the man who founded plate techtonics is a Christian, don't you? Look him up. Dr. Baumgartner's Christian testimony is posted publically. Once you confirm this will you then abandon plate techtonics?

Answer 6

i don't know how 'wise layout' that's a idea may study alongside a technology like evolution. at the same time as 'relics' and different historic artifacts may be provided as information of the existence of particular cults. tribes and personalities, what 'resourceful realism' do they information, except the personalities in contact and diverse sessions of their manufacture? I actually have no longer began to work out any certainly information or information of an wise dressmaker of the Cosmos and its contents. also, in spite of the undeniable fact that I actually have not in any respect been able to conceive 'eternity', that length of time, infinity, replaced into available for the Cosmos to strengthen the dirt that became our international. I did study one technology record that reported that count number appearing out of nothingness has been said. (at the same time as i replaced right into a baby, we called them 'zits', yet that's yet another tale.) (What has Hannah Montana (above) been smoking?)

Answer 7

We could save time by teaching all of Satanic Science (gravity, atomic theory, geometry, evolution, etc.) along with Biblical Sience.

Answer 8

:) Good one!