[metmom]

If 10,000 scientists think that the earth is flat and one proves it's round then it's round.

You need to brush up on the caltech definitions as used in science. Nothing in science is proved, only disproved.

http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/jarrett/LiU/resource/misused_glossary.html

Proof: A term from logic and mathematics describing an argument from premise to conclusion using strictly logical principles. In mathematics, theorems or propositions are established by logical arguments from a set of axioms, the process of establishing a theorem being called a proof.

The colloquial meaning of "proof" causes lots of problems in physics discussion and is best avoided. Since mathematics is such an important part of physics, the mathematician's meaning of proof should be the only one we use. Also, we often ask students in upper level courses to do proofs of certain theorems of mathematical physics, and we are not asking for experimental demonstration!

So, in a laboratory report, we should not say "We proved Newton's law" Rather say, "Today we demonstrated (or verified) the validity of Newton's law in the particular case of..." Source.

"Proof", like "truth" is a word best avoided in science.

[Filo]

You need to brush up on the caltech definitions as used in science. Nothing in science is proved, only disproved.

Nonsense. You certainly can prove things scientifically, CalTech's semantic dissembling aside.

Kinda reminds me of an old comparative anatomy professor who wouldn't let us use the word "creature" because it implied creation. . . regarless of the fact that everyone knew what the damn word meant.