Exactly. You can do all this and you'll end up with a super convoluted theory that basically says: the laws of physics have conspired to make everything look like as if there was dark matter.
The laws of physics (of the time) conspired to make everything look as if there was phlogiston, too.
Is chemistry "convoluted" to you? The concept of oxidation? Combustion? These are big words with lots of implications, are we sure they're warranted given how easy it is to chalk it up to phlogiston?
> The laws of physics (of the time) conspired to make everything look as if there was phlogiston, too.
No, they conspired to make it look as if some substance was transferred between fuel and air during combustion, and between the air and the lungs during respiration, which is true. It happens to be absorbed from the air and not by it, but until and unless you actually devised an experiment to test that, there's no way you could have known. Anyone absolutely convinced of the existence of oxygen in 1600 was being just as unreasonable as someone absolutely convinced of phlogiston - they just got lucky.
Is chemistry "convoluted" to you? The concept of oxidation? Combustion? These are big words with lots of implications, are we sure they're warranted given how easy it is to chalk it up to phlogiston?