> This is like ants arguing that life outside their ant hill will likely have 6 or 8 legs because all the life they've seen so far have had 6 or 8 legs. I've n

> This is like ants arguing that life outside their ant hill will likely have 6 or 8 legs because all the life they've seen so far have had 6 or 8 legs. I've never liked this kind of argument because ants don't argue. So you're saying that the thing that we're doing is like something else that doesn't exist, and using that impossible connection to draw a larger conclusion. Ants don't argue because they don't have brains to do so. We argue because we have the brains to do so, and those brains allow us to do so much more like actually measure and interpret the world around us to draw the kinds of conclusions that you're seeing here. Even if ants could argue with each other the question would become are they arguing about anything relevant? Can they measure and reason about the world around them? Can they do science?