Keep Guessing, Silly "Scientists"

Aristotle used his 5 senses and his magnificent mind to become one of the earliest scientist-philosophers, a term I use to combine science, which is, or at least ought to be, wholly based on using our 5 senses for observation of "things" and making connections between what is observed, with philosophy, which is trying to figure out what our senses cannot reveal to us through direct observation.  I assert here that science is continually and acceleratingly shading into philosophy, and that that is a bad thing.  The difference between the scientist-philosopher, of which Aristotle and Saint Thomas Aquinas are exemplary models, and some of today's "scientists" is that while Aristotle and Thomas clearly delineated the two and used scientific or sensory observation of "things" to form their philosophies to color that which could not be observed, today's scientists use their philosophy, their postulated explanations of that which has not been observed, to create what is presented to the world as science.  And when they are eventually proven wrong by new facts that have only just now been brought to light (whether "now" was yesterday, 50 years ago, or 500 years ago), do they see the error of their ways and admit that they do not have enough observations of relevant "things" to form the philosophy that they are attempting to force upon the world as "science"?  Of course not!  They only revise their theories, which are subsequently treated as newfound knowledge and celebrated by the masses as advances in human achievement, when in fact all they really are are usually nothing more than future disproved nonsense.

A recent case to illustrate this topic is what has come to be generally accepted by most people as the "theory of evolution," which portrays homo sapiens sapiens (yes, there are two sapiens, if you thought it was a typo) as the culmination of hundreds of millions of years of genetic variation and mutation until finally, voici!  Mankind in all his artistic and never-ending creative glory!  Skipping over the first several hundreds of millions of years of life on this planet and going right to the past 200,000-1,000,000 (this seems a rather large span of time, but bear with me), we have in the fossil record a sampling of old bones that resemble humans, or chimpanzees, or apes, in that their skulls or hands or legs or what have you are somewhat reminiscent of human skulls and so forth.  "Scientists" cannot even agree on the age of these bones; at one point, they may be declared as approximately 400,000 years old, but then after some other dating "advancement" or discovery of other relative "evidence" it may be re-trumpeted as 285,000 years old, or even 800,000 years old.  The point is, it cannot be known how old the bones are, because it never was and never can be a fact that was observed and recorded by anyone at any time.  Nor can it be observed what these creatures actually looked like, what they did, or how they did it.  What HAS been observed and recorded is the fact that humans are the only creatures, ever, to record their observations.  Be it cave art or notches of hunting kills on a stone axe, people are the only creatures to have ever bothered or been able to record their observations.  Was this "evolution?"  Did it just randomly occur to some heretofore unintelligent prehistoric beast after hundreds of millions of years to record an observation of something in some way?  And would this spark of brilliance be related to the same miraculous (just don't call it "God") flash that ignited life on this planet from lifelessness in the first place, or the "big bang" that supposedly started the universe from a massive (or was it massless) yet infinitesimally tiny ball of nothingness, or everythingness?  And why do these theories make perfect rational sense to "scientists" and people the world over, while they simultaneously refuse to entertain the possibility that God exists?  Finally, why again, exactly, do we trust everything these "scientists" tell us, when almost none of it has been observed by anyone, ever?  Where are Saint Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle when you need them?!