: "''I amended my previous held belief with the new information in less than three seconds, mostly because '''the origin of the moon doesn't affect any of my core beliefs.'''''" (emphasis added) Exactly. The same applies to me. But if it did?
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:29, 21 December 2007 (EST)
So, you won't care much if it turned out that the moon was 30 million years older than you previously thought? Interesting.
Looking at language, vocabulary, idioms, etc is science, but we already know that you stick to a very limited view of science. Essentially, you want to use all the tools and techniques commonly used in science for yourself, to get from the evidence to "reasonably certain conclusions". But you don't want scientists to use the same tools and methods to get to reasonably certain conclusion? Using your own standard, you too will have to admit that you never heard a native speaker of old semitic languages such as Aramaic, but of course you won't hold this against yourself, only against scholars that disagree with you. It seems like you feel the need to measure with two measures to be able to defend your position. [[User:Order|Order]] 12:43, 21 December 2007 (EST)
===Motivations===