True, I would go so far as to say science can never fully discount anything. What we are learning from quantum physics and work involving very large numbers (and infinity) and very small numbers, exceptions occur to even proven laws.
That's the point really, paradigms are always shifting and what we once thought was irrefutable fact, then becomes deconstructed as we go deeper into the rabbit hole. We've already discovered things that we could never have imagined possible a hundred years ago and the rate of knowledge is exponential.
You really have plenty of friends don't you. Even if that happened we'd still be far better off than your small club.
From Garth Crooks to paradigms - what a surreal thread. Not even Mark E. Smith could be that diverse - or perverse?
Outside of a football IQ test, I'm not sure science could prove that Garth is an imbecile with regards to punditry and footballing knowledge... But everyone knows that he is. And his footballing knowledge is completely the reverse of exponential growth.
Whilst not strictly adhering to scientific result, one could employ the process of Occam's razor when appraising Garth Crooks, which would dictate that the hypothesis that he is an imbecile is correct.
Careful, you are in danger of raising the intellectual level of this board. Using Occam's razor correctly; next thing you know you will be using the word 'irony' correctly as well!
