jpsdad,
Tone is very difficult to convey over the internet.
You made the exact opposite conclusion than what I intended from my hyperbole in the comment you quoted. (It was an easy conclusion to reach based on my clumsy construction.)
My point was NOT to laugh at our current state of understanding genetics. It was to reinforce how little we actually know at this stage on an incredibly complex topic that has very subtle interactions between an extremely high number of variables.
This topic is certainly more complicated than physical chemistry. We are past the equivalent of the "phlogiston theory of combustion", but IMHO we could still have a knowledge gap almost as large as not yet discovering oxygen.
Actually I didn't form a conclusion. I added to the last comment because it was a conclusion that you made that I think is probably a very accurate prediction. Indeed many may laugh and in the same breath consider the present ideas settled. I was just adding that we shouldn't do that! We should learn from history that we will never stop learning that we were wrong!
Just to be sure you understand Rod. I did not intend to represent your comment as one condoning laughing at the past or considering science settled. It was clear to me you were expressing the irony of it all. It spoke to me and I wanted to expand on it . I think critical of review of one's comfortable thinking ... seeking fault in one's thinking ... and the willingness to change one's mind in the light of evidence are very important qualities/activity of good scientists. Truth has much more subtle meaning in science than it has in popular thought.
