Science isn't about proof, nor is it philosophically bull****, Karl Popper's philosophy is an important part of modern scientific thought. He felt that science should be about eliminating alternative explanations. By eliminating more and more alternatives you create a theory that mirrors reality and allows you to predict something about the future on the basis of assumptions and measurements.
This unfortunately becomes demonstrably limited if you ask on this basisi if you can prove a disproof, you can't. No sensible scientist ever seriously talks about proof other than as a way of short-hand (it's less cumbersome to say we have proven something than "We have conditionally eliminated all the our imagined, logical alternatives to this explanation".)
The fewer assumptions you make the less likely you are to make errors in what you say but the more you make by missing out important points about reality so whoever said that assumption is the mother of all **** ups may have made one too many false assumption..

I really liked Josh's unprovably wet water. Herve mentioned earlier that measurements can be made on the position of particles that wouldn't have been there to measure if you hadn't tried to measure them. If you regard measuring the position of an object as like asking the question "where is the particle" then by asking the question you are creating an answer. If you find out what questions to ask perhaps you can make more palatable answers. That would be real power, changing the future by predicting what your speculations about it can do.

If only it was that easy.. by asking "dumn or what" I triggered a whole bunch of people to contribute a heap of irrelevant (but worthwhile), weird, entertaining and interesting ****, cheers!

.. but don't take my word for it.. I've been dumn before!