On 02/23/2012 12:41 PM, Ron Hoggan wrote:

>
> I sorely doubt that the "rain from Mars" hypothesis is likely to
> stand up to any measure of scientific scrutiny. However, if William
> wants to believe in it I think that he should be allowed to express
> that belief without worry about name calling and offensive, sweeping
> generalizations.
>

Unlike the evolution of Man hypothesis, Martian water transfer is 
supported by evidence so it is a theory.

I suggest that hypotheses are best used as tools, to be discarded if 
they don't produce usable results. Note NASA's problem caused by 
clinging to their stupid "space is electrically neutral" hypothesis in 
spite of McCanney's discovery that space is electrically charged. 
Likewise "comets are little dirty snowballs" in spite of the actual 
photos of comets, especially the recent comet Lovejoy. Both from Nasa's 
own sources.
These three different theories support the notion that competent thought 
(AKA science) is rare, and/or that trolls abound and need to be culled, 
as they were >1,000 years ago.

William