Applying judicial reasoning and ‘preponderance of evidence’ standard—does the weight of credible data make intelligent design more likely than not?
- For Loeb: The multiplicity of independent anomalies satisfies probative relevance and demands further discovery.
- For NASA: The burden of extraordinary claims remains unmet absent direct evidence of propulsion, signal, or artificial morphology.
The Court of Public Opinion
Ultimately, the verdict belongs to humanity’s collective reason. Loeb’s hypothesis forces an uncomfortable confrontation between established scientific orthodoxy and the legal principle of open discovery. As in landmark cases from Galileo to Roe, paradigm shifts often begin with one dissenting brief filed in good faith.
For more on 3I/ATLAS
