Tim Daneliuk (in ) said:

| But the exact argument in question is
| whether or not it *ought to become* a part of science. As I have
| said over and over, this reluctance by the science establishment
| smacks of turf protection, ideological defense (by atheists), and
| undermines the claims of the objectivity of the establishment
| scientific community. If it's baloney demonstrate it, otherwise
| engage and have a meaningful conversation on the matter ...

[referee blows whistle]

You're claiming here, as I understand your words, that your opponent
in this debate can only hold a valid stance if he can prove a
negative.

If that's the case, then the subject matter of the debate is moot -
because the debate process itself has already been tainted. To insist
on carrying any debate forward under such terms at least verges on
intellectual dishonesty.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html