[jpsb]

I read something very interesting the other day about a mamals inner ear evolving twice. That indecates some mechanism at work. There is a lot of inconclusive evidence supporting something like evolution. Gravity on the other hand is a slam dunk. I personally do not think evolution should be taught as scientific fact, but rather as our current best guess, something is going on but until we understand the mechanism better keeping an open mind should be encougaged.

[RadioAstronomer]

I read something very interesting the other day about a mamals inner ear evolving twice. That indecates some mechanism at work. There is a lot of inconclusive evidence supporting something like evolution. Gravity on the other hand is a slam dunk. I personally do not think evolution should be taught as scientific fact, but rather as our current best guess, something is going on but until we understand the mechanism better keeping an open mind should be encougaged.

IMHO, evolution is a more complete theory than gravity. At least we have a better handle on it.

[stremba]

Gravity on the other hand is a slam dunk.

Oh really. Please then explain to me precisely why it is that two massive bodies attract each other with a force proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of their separation distance. According to general relativity, it's because of the warping of the geometry of space-time. Why does matter warp space-time? If matter warps space-time and creates an energetic attraction, why doesn't this energy further warp space-time (since matter and energy are equivalent) and create a new energetic interaction, which would then further warp space-time and so on ad infinitum until we have infinite energy? The origin of the diversity of species is certainly much better understood than is gravity.