GSandSDS Yes - you see where i'm coming from :) The scientific
   method is held up as "the holy grail" of fact finding when we're
   in elementary school when it's really a method of fact finding
   that works very well, but it's not infallible and sometimes
   theories get thrown away from technicalities which turn out to
   be true decades later. I guess that's why I mention science can
   be faddy. Part of it is funding: If you want to get funded in
   science in the 1990s, you had to add a mention of Global
   Warming. That's where the money for funding is. Science doesn't
   usually happen in a vacuum. Someone pays for the research. The
   people who pay for the research are usually NOT scientists and
   have their own agenda, whatever they may be. Because
   non-scientists are driven by fads, and non-scientists fund the
   research the scientists will make, the scientists often will
   have to customize their research to fit the fads of the day.
   beyond that, though, by fad I mean "what's popular" in
   scientific circles vs "what's rejected". Example; The Aether.
   We're taught in school to mock the 19th century for believing in
   the Aether. Yet, if you really look at different theories
   through the past century, the Aether comes back over and over
   under different names. Currently it's Quantum Foam. There's
   nothing wrong with the Luminiferous Aether concept being reused
   in different ways; I think the ppl in the 19th century had the
   right idea IN PRINCIPAL but it needed more knowledge to be
   reworked. That's my point about fads. There are things you are
   not allowed to talk about and have it called science, even if
   they may be true. There's a lot more forbidden than not. You
   will be rejected if you don't use the right language, get
   published in the rght journals (some journals are considered
   junk, some are considered Golden) - and there is a lot of
   competition in Science. "Publish or Die" is one of the reasons
   why I didn't go into science. I heard horror stories when I was
   young about the process and thought, 'no no, not for me". I'm
   not mocking science; just saying there's a difference between
   the "idea" of science - which is often held up as the Holy Grail
   of Truth - and the reality of science, which is quite messy and
   political and full of public relations, press releases, funding
   problems, gossiping and backbiting, etc. Just like every field
   where humans are.