If scientists all joined hands every Sunday and sang songs & gave speeches about how Gravity is real...?

The most sure signs of insecurity is hiding the facts. Anyone secure in their information is pleased enough to show why they came to that conclusion, knowing another rational mind will also grasp it.

When you have made it all up as you went, you don't have that option, and would rather not even go there.

They have told me for many years they have evidence that is convincing, yet they have 100% refused to show any of that at all, none.

That alone tells us they have no evidence, or they would beat it to death.

Your idea is interesting and correct. The irony of your question is that Einstein's theory of relativity was proved in 1972. One part of his theory that is now accepted by all Scientists is that there is no such thing as Gravity as defined by Sir Isaac Newton. Actually, Newton did what many scientists do is that when they can't find out why something happens they give the thing a name and then give the name a definition that no one can check on. Newton was of course a genius and I mean him no disrespect, but, he tried to figure out why apples fall down and why the moon doesn't fall down but why it doesn't fly away either. He couldn't figure it out so he gave it a name, "Gravity" and then he gave Gravity a definition that no one could check on. Newton said that Gravity was the "intrinsic" quality of matter that makes matter be attracted to other matter. Einstein was also brilliant and he was kind also. He said that Newton would have discovered Einstein's stuff if the ability to precisely measure things had been the same in Newton's time.

Anyway, Einstein discovered that matter falls toward other matter because Space is not nothing as had been supposed but that Space was something and that that something was "bent by matter. I'll stop there I know I went on too long. So, There is no such thing as gravity as Newton defined it but Scientists still call something Gravity for some sneaky reason.

Of course. Therefore religion must be a science and no just sentimentalism. And knowledge and faith also must go together.

i see what your saying. Of course, science has all the facts. Religion has none. But I see what you're getting at.

I persoanlly would like to see fundies refuse to accept "science" and test it for themselves.

Of course, even though that's not what scientists would ever do.

No.

Because you didn't say, "It's for the children."

:P

You lost me at "if".

zdjp/rtsm

d,pf