[ncos]

It's quite amazing how different people can come up with different explanations for the same set of facts. Steve's explanation can not be falsified. It is far from parsimonious. It is definitely not repeatable by third parties. It's not internally logically consistent (some of his explanations directly contradict others).

Of course, we can't prove him wrong. Maybe he's right about all of this. Too, maybe the world was created in seven days by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. Epistemology gives us the tools we need to filter out the most probable theories from the least probable theories.

Steve's explanation does not pass epistemological muster (to clarify: we can't prove him wrong, but it does not pass the tests that are traditionally required to know that something is true).

Steve has officially lost the right to claim that he is a "math and science" thinker.