(March 15, 2010 at 6:19 pm)Frank Wrote: For instance, if I qualify a statement (by saying "assuming I exist and the laws of nature remain unchanged") then I can make conclusive statements.
The fact that you must make those assumptions is what holds my argument together. Strictly speaking, we cannot know the second assumption to be true- we merely make the deduction that it is due to our past experience with it. That's not to say that things can't change tomorrow; we cannot rule out the possibility of supernatural occurences in the same way we cannot conclusively rule out the possibilty of a god. It COULD happen. As such, the extent to which science can claim "proof" is limited by this exceptionally thin margin of uncertainty.