Corpuscles Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> However , when referring to the real world and
> professionals, the only legitimate challenge of
> "being wrong" that can be or ought be made, is by
> those whom already are fully aware of the
> basis of or level of proof as it currently stands,
> and ALSO can offer valid better proof of it being
> "wrong" before deeming it worthy of challenge!

I'm not sure what you mean by "making a legitimate challenge of 'being wrong'".

If you're referring to proving that someone else's claim is false, I'm not as interested in proving anyone wrong, at least at GHMB. Rather, what concerns me is that when someone makes a claim that something is true, they must be ready, willing, and able to cite proof that validates that claim. If they can't present such proof, then their claim remains a tentative hypothesis/speculation.

The proof that validates a claim as "fact" must already exist before a claim can be stated as fact, even if it's never challenged. The proof is irrelevant to the challenge. When I challenge a claim, it's simply a request to present that allegedly pre-existing proof.

Likewise, it's not logical to state that a claim must be accepted as true until someone else can prove it is false. Otherwise, making the simple claim "the earth was fabricated by intelligent beings from another planet" must be accepted as true since no one can prove it to be false.