You wrote:
=================================================================
I would be more than happy to fulfill your request and defensively explain
how I have been consistent, but that you have misconstrued what I said.
However, time constraints force me to delay until this weekend. My
apologies for any inconvenience this may cause you.
Kevin L. O'Brien
================================================================
That is no inconvenience for me at all. But my request was actually
that you NOT defensively explain how you have been consistent, but rather
that you explain what your original claim that "no physical law has
ever been proven wrong" really means. Perhaps in view of comments offered
by Brian and others, you can clarify it. It is certainly better to
hold a truthful position at the end of the day than merely be able to
claim that one has been consistent in one's opinions. (Of course we would
all like to be able to say that *both* are true...but that is rarely the
case, at least for me.) I for one really respect people who are able to admit
that their views have changed after exposure to new evidence or to exchanges
with others. It is a sign of intellectual humility and growth.
Stan Zygmunt