Len Gaasenbeek:

It is interesting to note that the only "science" which frequently
makes use of "thought experiments" to make a point is Relativistic
Physics.

That isn't true.

No engineer in his right mind would design a bridge based on a thought
experiment, nor would a surgeon prepare himself to remove a cancerous
tumour by first doing a thought experiment.

Sure they do. Engineers (or at least, good ones) first imagine a bridge,
then imagine different ways of constructing it according to the design
constraints. Then they perform calculations and model what they've
though of doing. Surgeons do the same thing when imagining how they
will perform a surgery. Some bridges and surgeries may be routine,
but if no one did thought experiments in tjose occupations, people
would still be swinging across rivers on vines and having the local
medicine man cast out demons.

The only difference between relativity and those other things
is that in relativity, you don't have the option of testing an
idea immediately after conceiving of it, so that quite a lot of
care has to go into constructing a thought experiment that doesn't
contain faulty reasoning. Bridges do fall fall down and patients
do die from erroneous thought experiments, so it's obvious when
those go wrong.

Look at the bright side. Thought experiments in relativity
which go awry are a lot cheaper and less devastating than
a bridge that falls down or a surgeon that drills a hole
through someone's skull in the wrong place.

Nor, for that matter, would a car mechanic fix your car or a cook
prepare a meal, based on a thought experiment.

I guess you've never been in a position where you had to do something
for which no one else had written up instructions.

A thought-experiment is a contradiction in terms since, unlike a scientific
experiment, it doesn't produce measurable results or prove anything.

Of course it doesn't prove anything. It is, however, the only
way to design real experiments that are capable of disproving
theories. Would you feel better about physicists just doing
random experiments which aren't guaranteed to answer any question
whatsoever? Didn't think so.