From: retour@contactprospect.com   
      
   "David Mitchell"  a écrit dans le message de   
   news: pan.2007.02.01.20.35.49.437900@edenroad.demon.co.uk   
      
   > They were hypothesis which were disproved.  That's how science works.   
   > It self-corrects.  No other system of discovering knowledge can make that   
   > claim.   
      
   No, it isn't the matter.  Science provided some "likelihoods", and if those   
   likelihoods were used like you did in that thread, no advances would have   
   been done.  Science doesn't provide any proof, it can only falsify theories.   
   So, it can't be used to claim anything.   
      
   And yes, other systems of discovering knowledge can change the likelihoods   
   and make science advance.  So, arguing science in order not to examine other   
   hypothesis is self-contradictory.   
      
   > Oh really?  So Wilbur and Orville Wright were poets?  Goddard was a poet?   
   > Einstein was a poet?   
      
   Kepler and Newton, two famous example, were.  Newton made an alexandrine   
   with the rainbow colours.  Einstein said that imagination is more important   
   than knowledge.  Science alone is as efficient as a bird with only one wing.   
      
   --   
   ~~~~ clmasse on free F-country   
   Liberty, Equality, Profitability.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)