What oddball is pointing at... some aspect of religion (as written in the "book") contains historical fact in perspective of the writer. There are several things that also cannot be proven. And i must say, people who try to prove that part zealously are plain idiots. Same thing for those trying so hard to disprove it. Why go to the extreme? Why be extreme agnostic/atheist/etc? What's the difference with religious fanatic fuckheads then?
This is also true in science. Some of it are true dead-facts. Your computer is working, your airplane is flying, your car is running, your gas cooker is burning well, all science. Though there are some aspects of it that even science can't exactly explain (like two exact copied program run differently in the same compiler, which defies logic).
And transonic shockwave... human can go beyond that (supersonic), yet they still can't explain what happen to the wave in between transonic and supersonic speed, why the supersonic shockwave only occur in some parts of the airplane? It cause aerodynamic buffeting and upset the airframe. Science still can't answer it YET.
When science was proven wrong? When people believe that earth was the centre of the universe. When they say we can go beyond certain speed limit (from 60 km/h, 120 km/h, 200 km/h, mach 1.0, and lastly, the speed of light). In time, it will be all BS, knowing how little all human know about "the truth", got to have some humility in that science is a BIG thing, what human knows, is LITTLE.
Isaac Newton himself is a humble religious person & semi-insane traumatic scientist. Einstein once said, "religion without science is lame, science without religion is blind."
I am trying to be a balanced person here... going to sunday service every week. Reading science journal, observe situation, think rationally, that's all. No extreme belief or disbelief in something.
