Yes, it is called counterintuitive drivel on a good day and nonsense on all others.

It must have been a dark day when leading scientists, or at least ones who thought they were leading, decided that the true meaning of the word theory makes our semi-educated guesses look bad so let’s just change the meaning of the word; It is a lie but the masses are too stupid to notice.

You are WAY out of your depth in this thread.

What is the correct term to use when a major religion changes its position on something?

Hypocrisy? 😉

If you were President of the United States, and assuming that there was no problem getting law changes through the various Federal and State government bodies, what gun-control laws (if any) would you be happy to see?

Seeing as we have something like 23,000 gun laws on the books right now, I think we could safely reduce that to about 10-12
.. maybe 20 max.

Pretty good interview here:

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/01/06/new-gun-control-study-murder-rates-higher-states-restrictive-concealed-carry-laws

Re 139

Your second paragraph redeems the nonsense of the first.

Your incomprehension is not my responsibility.

For those among us who still don’t get it…

Scientists use the word theory in a way that differs from its usage in everyday speech. In everyday speech a theory is no different from a hypothesis – a supposition that has not been verified. A scientific theory, on the other hand, is a synthesis of a large body of information that encompasses well-tested and verified hypotheses about certain aspects of the natural world. Physicists, for example, speak of the theory of the atom, chemist speak of molecular theory, and biologists speak of cell theory.

The theories of science are not fixed, but undergo change. Scientific theories evolve as they go through stages of redefinition and refinement. During the past hundred years, for example, the theory of the atom has been repeatedly refined as new evidence of atomic behavior has been gathered. Similarly, chemists have refined their view of the way molecules bind together, and biologists have refined the cell theory. The refinement of theories is a strength of science, not a weakness. Many people feel that it is a sign of weakness to change their minds. Competent scientists must be experts at changing their minds. They change their minds, however, only when confronted with solid experimental evidence to the contrary or when a conceptually simpler hypothesis forces them to a new point of view. More important than defending beliefs is improving them. Better hypotheses are made by those who are honest in the face of experimental evidence.

& then there are people who think The Flintstones is a documentary…

Said to build on Lott & Mustard’s earlier work that came to similar conclusions,

But was study was dismissed by the National Research Comittee thus:-

Moggy

Which adds to the evidence that the NRC was wrong 😉

More inconvenience..

http://www.mediaite.com/online/new-study-demolishes-almost-every-gun-control-myth/

Not angered, but amused & not in a good way.
I was hooning through some canyons a few days ago (Camaro, not the bike) & came up behind some guy on Harley. I know the next stop sign was less than 3 miles up the hill so I pulled over & waited 4 minutes to get a clear run up the hill.

I take off & barely get half way up the damn hill when I come up behind the Harley again….. cruising along at NINETEEN mph in a 45mph limit….AND he slowed down for the corners….