From: Robert Comer 

>random suggestions may be right or wrong as well, would you give them the
>same weight as something that has at least partial proof?

It depends on the situation and the proof.  A photograph isn't enough proof
to sway the argument as it's too easily faked.

>There are two kinds of proof, positive proof and negative proof.  A lack of
>natural phenomenon could be considered at least a partial negative proof.

There is no such thing as negative proof.

>Precognition would not be possible unless the future is already set.. 

Nope.  But anyway, how would you get there from here if it's static...

--
Bob Comer




On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:37:57 -0400, "Geo."  wrote:

>"Robert Comer" 
wrote in message
>news:fcps13tb0493oa9cedsm1apolfrbq4dosk{at}4ax.com...
>
>> But both my be right (or wrong).
>
>random suggestions may be right or wrong as well, would you give them the
>same weight as something that has at least partial proof?
>
>> This discussion about possible FTL travel is not pure science yet,
>> it's just belief (for or against)
>
>There are two kinds of proof, positive proof and negative proof.  A lack of
>natural phenomenon could be considered at least a partial negative proof.
>
>> of time. Precognition is the main reason why I think that,
>
>Precognition would not be possible unless the future is already set.. 
>
>Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5