Sunrisepony wrote:"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence." I don't remember where I read this, but I like the quote.
This is an excellent quote!
Let's keep in mind that even though we may have no evidence that something does not exist, we also do not have evidence that it does exist. Bob137 hit the nail right on the head with his assessment of the correlation between the AAT, the God particle theory, the Big Bang theory, and string theory. They all have one thing in common - they are all theories. That means they haven't been accepted as fact by the scientific community, and shouldn't be for that matter. However, not all theories are equal. Some theories are basically 99% proven true, but there is just one aspect that is either non-testable with current technologies or non-observable due to other circumstances (have to wait for a specific star alignment for example). Thus, they remain as hypothetical conjecture, even though mathematical models, and other scientific data, point to them being 100% accurate. Still, the scientific community holds enough integrity not to write anything off as fact until it has satisfied 100% of the criteria.
Many scientific fields build on some of these theories that haven't been 100% satisfied, and that is a dangerous practice indeed. However, we must also realize that much of scientific facts and laws has been extensively proven to hold true again and again - these things we should not hold disbelief, though we should also still reserve the right to invalidate them should data become available suggesting they are, in fact, invalid.