>>Hi Dragan. Are you sure I was the right receipient for this post? I gave up because there is no discussion possible with a mind that is made up. I could not be bothered to argue the point any further. It did not warrant my time. I leave it to you and Alex :)
>
>I'm actually getting weary of this myself. It's frustrating to me that the pattern of argument from your side of the fence seems to be to put words in my mouth that I didn't say and go about proving that to be wrong. If I didn't say it then that doesn't make me wrong.

Well I still can't follow - you're somehow equating the expectation of future development of science to some sort of faith. And we're arguing that this isn't faith - we don't think that any particular result will be surely be achieved within any given time period, nor that it will be proven to fit with the rest of the knowledge once we have it, nor that it will not be unproven later. All of that is possible. I don't see any leap of faith here, and specially not the "credo quia absurdum est".

If people of faith had so much doubt and reserve to whatever their deities did, I doubt that there'd be more than five religions left on Earth by now.