Why Science Can’t Replace Religion

[skepticscott]

117. I noticed you very conspicuously ducked and dodged

the fundamental question about muons, quarks and neutrinos, on the basis that, since I didn't bring it up in my very first post of the thread, it wasn't legitimate. Whatever. The bottom line is that scientists conduct experiments and acquire evidence supporting the existence of ALL of those particles (which have analogous characteristics to those Asquith attributes to quarks), by a similar process of inquiry and examination to verify the reliability of data. There is NOTHING that makes the acceptance of the existence of one fundamentally different than any of the others. Zip. Zero. Nada.

Your endless harping on the availability of "home electron testing kits" notwithstanding. Why is it any less a matter of "faith" to accept that those kits actually do what they are purported to do than it is to accept published scientific findings about the existence of sub-atomic particles, since it's just a bunch of scientists telling you that they work and what's happening when you use them, and since you're not observing electrons directly in any case? There is NO difference.