3
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 38:
Line 38: + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
::The oldest paper there is from generation 20,000.[[User:JPohl|JPohl]] 14:20, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
::The oldest paper there is from generation 20,000.[[User:JPohl|JPohl]] 14:20, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
There is no contradiction in "obtaining or admission of non-existence". If a piece of data is essential for a conclusion and yet does not exist then that non-existence provides bad faith on the part of the person reaching (and publishing) the conclusion.
I do understand about 'public scrutiny'. However this undefined 'public scrutiny' is vacuous testing 'in potentia'. I am suggesting actual public scrutiny. I am suggesting formulation of a hypothesis and a test which that hypothesis may fail. If it escapes refutation it will become corroborated. If it fails then we must accept that failure.
Cheers
Tony (on a windows mobile device and unable to "sign")