Michael Daly wrote:
On 11-Feb-2005, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

As far as the scientific method, sometimes it was not so
scientific

Don't confuse the scientific method for the nonsense that some people
practice.

Mike

Therein lies the problem, Evolutionism is based on an underlying
philosophy called Uniformatarianism, not a scientific method at all.
Just the assumtion that processes follow one after the other. Makes
understanding thing much easier. The only problem is that the evidence
does not bare this out. The uniformatarian scientist just went out and
found info that supported there position, and ignored info that did
not. Sort of like picking yourself up by your boot straps. And hence
uniformatarianism has fallen into disrepute in many quarters, and the
superstructure of evolution abandoned by many scientist.

Another philosophy has become more acceptable recently in the
scientific community called Catastrophism. This basically says that
cataclismic events occurred in the course of history that completely
changed the course of history. Radical events and elements have been
injected into the course of history that have determined where we are
today. These events would make following any uniform record impossible.
Hence though the dinosaur records are interesting, they are not
complete, and cannot be relied on for scientific information. Even such
test procedures as C-14 dating etc would not be considered reliable.

The bottom line is that what we "know" is a pitance, and a little early
even yet for making concluding scientific proof of process. TnT