[sjastro]

Craig,

PC is a faith based subject which attempts to disguise itself as a science.

For example:

Data is interpreted on preconceived ideas. For example a PC adherent will look at the filamentary structure of M1 and proudly announce that the structure is due to Birkeland currents constrained in a Z pinch and yet another grand demonstration of PC.
A mainstream scientist will say "hang on Charlie (or should I say Alex), why don't we examine the spectrum of the filaments." The spectrum reveals the filaments to be Ha emissions caused by transistion of electrons into different energy levels in hydrogen atoms.
Hence the filaments are not even made of plasma let alone Birkeland currents.
Try explaining that to the PC adherent. The standard reply is "I can reproduce something in "the lab" that looks vaguely like the filamentary structure of M1 hence your Quantum mechanics and all the supporting experimental evidence must be wrong."
Note that in PC "the lab" is irrefutable, infallible and assumes godlike status. What is even more absurd is that we do not even have the technological capability of reducing cosmic scale events into a laboratory test.
So PC's own claim as an "empirical science" is highly questionable.
Note that the term "empirical science" is a tautology as science by it's very nature is empirical including "maths based" science, such as cosmology and particle physics, despite the babble from PC adherents.

Regards

Steven