[Eisenstein]

> It sounds like you don't know what the scientific method is?

I take from that response that you just assume that the scientific method was important but don't know why. I will posit that is because it wasn't as important as you assume.

> tend to be

What number of exceptions would there need to be before you accepted that the entire premise was wrong?

[WalterBright]

I conclude you are just being argumentative.

[Eisenstein]

How did you tell the difference between being right while facing an obstinate opponent, and being argumentative?