A theory to replace a theory....anyone else seeing the irony here? =.=
“However, researchers from Washington University in St. Louis, MO and the Royal Hollway University of London now say that the crystals have been misidentified and that they are actually common clumps of another form of carbon.”
Let me guess, from man discovering how to build a fire?
Theories are supposed to be replaced by other theories, even in climatology. That’s the whole point of scientific inquiry - real science is never “settled”.
Nothing new under the sun.
>>> A theory to replace a theory....anyone else seeing the irony here?
Nobody who ever took a science class. Reading threads such as this it’s depressing how many seem never to have done so.