> Science doesn't have a way to know when it has finally stumbled upon such a permanent theory though. It doesn't need to and I didn't claim it was trying to (

> Science doesn't have a way to know when it has finally stumbled upon such a permanent theory though. It doesn't need to and I didn't claim it was trying to (especially as it's impossible as you correctly point out). But the closer the model is to reality, the more useful the model is, and therefore the closer it is to being true. > Science isn't in the business of certifying its theories as true, just discarding them as false. Given the immensely complex and sophisticated and successful human achievements that depend on these models, such as spaceflight, computers, GPS, any number of things. I think you're doing the baby/bathwater thing. The models work very well so they must be very close approximations to what the universe does. So they approach 'the truth'. I think we may have to agree to disagree. It may be you see as a binary thing – it is or it isn't. I see it as graduated.