[PDerna]

Insofar as science is founded on propositions with no verifiable evidence, I maintain that there is a fundamental misunderstanding in your presuppositions. I apologize for putting words into your mouth, even if they may have been enlightening ones.

[PatrickHenry]

Insofar as science is founded on propositions with no verifiable evidence ...

You are incredibly confused. Consider the two axioms mentioned by jennyp earlier in post 375:

1. The evidence of our senses can basically be trusted; the world isn't trying to lie to us
2. Logic works; there are no contradictions

You say there's no evidence to support these propositions? None at all? Well, yes, that's what you're saying. I just quoted you. I don't know how you manage to get through each day without those two axioms at the base of everything you think and do, but that's for you to worry about.

If it will be any help to you, I'll repeat something I said earlier: axioms aren't proven. They can't be or they'd be theorems. This is not the equivalent of saying that they are lacking in evidentiary support. Indeed, in your entire existence I'll wager you've never encountered a single instance of anything which contradicted those axioms. Yet somehow you say ... ah, never mind.