where is your evidence that lurkers viewing a thread lack an education in the field of geology ?
:Rolleyes:
The 'No simple answer' fallacy again? Really?
It's Sciforums, not Geologyforums.
There is no burden of proof required for this assertion, it's pretty ordinary, I would go so far as suggesting it's a reasonable assumption. Although short of such a lurker posting to confirm as much, i'm not sure what proof could actually be provided that would satisfy you.
There are plenty of people out there who are interested in topics such as this in spite of, or because of the fact that they posses no formal education in Geology - you yourself have posted evidence of this.
There are plenty of people that have no formal education in geology that have formed a strong opinion on expanding earth theories, and again, you have provided us with proof of this. The funniest thing is that your assertion implies the opposite hypothesis - My hypothesis being that it might be true of some of the lurkers, the opposing hypothesis being implied by yourself being that it's true of none of them.
Can
you prove that
every lurker watching this thread possesses a formal education in Geology?
There are even well educated people in the world educated in fields
other than geology, that may have some degree of naivety of geology, who are interested in the topic, and/or have formed a strong opinion.
I am even of the opinion that the evidence availble, in the form of some of the discussions in this thread up until this point supports the hypothesis that people from all four categories have participated in this thread, at which point (if it hasn't prior to this) the hypothesis that people falling into all four categories may be watching the thread becomes almost tautological.