In other threads this issue seems to be coming up. I have always argued that there are more ways to know things than simply the scientific method. I've cited revelation, experience, faith, etc. Yet a number of people seem to think unless it's scientifically proven you can't know something. My opinion, whatever it's worth, is that it makes no sense to limit what you can know to the scientific method when most of the important things in life arent knowable by science. Can science prove if you love your spouse? Your family? Of course not. Do you not love them because science can't prove it? Can science prove someone guilty in a court of law? Sometimes, sometimes not. Are there other ways to do so? Of course. Why should we limit what we can learn to what science can prove? Why what we know be determined by whether someone in a lab can prove it to someone else? This is why science can never disprove faith. Because some knowledge exists outside the scope of the scientific method.