Re:Repeat after me ... (Score 1)

Lucas, you couldn't have stated that more eloquently. Many scientific documents almost use popular theory as a valid explanation when there are many substantial theories each as plausible as the next, so casually qouted by these pompous self-proclaimed experts. Just like scientific textbook definitions of the origin of the moon lists " collision-ring theory", that around the time earth was young and the solar system was conveniently full of debris, a planet size object collided with earth, thus earths gravitational influence captured this prior antithises, hence the moon in our night sky. I have often pondered the mere simplicity of this popularized rendition of the moons formation. Although these theories should be recognized, they should have no more relevance than any other till proven. It is obvious we need to change our mentality regarding our discoveries.