saibot,Originally Posted by saibot
I understand what you are saying...but logically, you cannot prove a negative, or positive, by the mere absence of something. "Proof" doesn't work that way. Just because a "missing link" has not appeared, does not prove that a "missing link" doesn't exist. I think DDT must agree with me on this.
And...not putting too fine a point on this, butttttt...a standard of "reasonable doubt" has only one, very narrow application...in American criminal trials.
"Reasonable doubt" has no application, no relevance or meaning, in proving or disproving a scientific theory.