Quote Originally Posted by focus206 View Post
You make it sound like both Paddon and Mirek claimed something that is not supported and not yet proven and they're on equal ground, when in reality Mirek said that Paddon's statement is not yet proven because we lack statistics, simple as that. Nobody is treating what Paddon said as if it's an absolute wrong 1+1=3 statement. It's up to Paddon to prove himself right either by datas or facts, it's not up to anybody to prove that their doubts about an unsupported statement are legitimate. Even because, if it's not legitimate to have doubts on an unsupported statement, it would mean we should just believe what everybody says without asking for datas/proofs? We could believe in Paddon's good faith and wait for him to show us, but it's not a mandatory law.
sorry, nope! It's not me making Mirek sound like. Just taking what he said. Just check!
Mirek didn't just said that claim was unsupported. he claimed it's false: "I only said the Paddon's claim was false because it was unsupported".

I'm not questioning anyone's legitimate doubt for sure! on that, I completely agree with you, I'm not taking it for granted me too, I've said a lot of time "time will tell".

I'm questioning the incorrect association no proof=false.

just this, not trying to diminish Mirek's knowledge or anything. a claim not proven can be controversial as you want and generate any kind of doubt, but doesn't mean it is false.
on this basis, nothing new can be achieved. I claim I can do something, then I go experimenting. doubt are normal and logical, but it's not that is automatically wrong (false) just because it was not done before (lack of data). when they set up for the moon, no claim on going there could be proven that moment, right?

anyway: a far too long "phylosofic" discourse for a rally forum. and way off topic. let's move on, shall we?