It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Your partially correct. I do have a problem with accepted theories, but only those which are disguised as factual rather than assumptions of best fit which they are.
The Big Bang comes to mind straight off the bat.
You seem to think that because a theory is accepted, it is beyond challenge.
Forgive me if I wish to question that which others blindly accept. Isn't that what denying ignorance is all about?
"If it walks and roars like a lion, don't assume it to be a lion, ruling out the possibility that it may be a tiger"
Invalid arguments often do help a great deal in arguing a given perspective, usually via the construction of a convincing yet erroneous argument, however it doesn't make it any more valid.
Remember that you mentioned the Big Bang has already been proven, for I will refer remind you of this later. In order for something to be proven it must be a fact. How can you prove something that is not a fact? The best you can do is present evidence which supports your hypothesis to such a degree that it strongly suggests your hypothesis may be accurate.
I believe I've covered all this before. With a cause and effect philosophy, how can one know a given effect with certainty without knowing the cause? The Big Bang and Evolution are both examples of this. I already stated and backed up my case for faith in scientific methodology, I do not wish to repeat it, just go back and re-read earlier responses I presented on this.
99% sounds like an extraordinary exaggeration! Could it be that 99% of the threads you participate in degenerate to this level? I wonder why that might be?