Talk:"You Can't Prove a Negative"

From SkepticWiki

The example "You can’t prove that some mechanical interaction isn’t non-conservative" is potentiallyy confusing for a couple of reasons.

1. It is a triple negative (can't/isn't/non-).

2. By "some mechanical interaction" do you mean "a given mechanical action"?

3. It requires the reader know about the scientific principal to which it refers. Perhaps a more commonly-known scientific principal could be used?

Yeah, good points all. I'll come up with something better, unless you'd like to edit.

Ah, the ruthless and merciless Dr. Kitten has taken care of it. Thanks!