Comments

All of science is based on theories or hypotheses which are then tested in experiments or researched until they seem to be sound. Theories that have proof to back them up are seen as true until proven otherwise. Take the theory of spontaneous generation, which is the belief that life starts from non-living objects (i.e. maggots originate from meat). This theory was taken as truth for centuries until Pasteur proved it wrong. Now, we believe in the germ theory, which will remain a truth for us until it too gets debunked. The same concept applies to all areas of science, including archeology. As far as millions of dollars being spent on theories that turn out to be false, the original theory may be determined to be false, but something was learned. For instance, Smorgasbord's comment about the theory of stones being hauled to the building site may have been proven to be wrong, but it was discovered that the stones were actually molded at the site, which was something we didn't know before. Had something like this happened in the medical field, the outcome could be something like the drug didn't work from colon cancer, but did an amazing job of shrinking a brain tumor. With out this theory, and its subsequent debunking, a new, more effective drug for brain tumors would never have been found. The whole of science is based on these theories and the testing of these theories. With out them, what would scientists have to study and experiment for? Where would we be today if these theories were not thought of?