> Science only works if contrarians get a voice. I completely agree, but it's counterintuitive. There's a part of me that thinks "science == reproducible, obse

> Science only works if contrarians get a voice. I completely agree, but it's counterintuitive. There's a part of me that thinks "science == reproducible, observable fact". But it really is much more (er, less) than that. It'd be nice if there was a different word for the "not irrefutable" parts (i.e. almost all of it).