A priori are things that are self evident though reason and need no experience to deduce. In the example of 2+2=4, it is not that it was true before humans knew it that makes it a priori, but rather that you can deduce, through reason, that it is true without the need for human experience. A posteriori however concerns things which require experience in order to deduce, such as the stove is hot when turned on. Thus if anything these new findings, although they were true before discovered, fall under the a posteriori category, as it relies on human experience and not reason alone as part of the deductive process.
Slashdot Mirror
if you look at your own link, you might realize that it is the past tense, thus making absolutly no sense in your sentence.
A priori are things that are self evident though reason and need no experience to deduce. In the example of 2+2=4, it is not that it was true before humans knew it that makes it a priori, but rather that you can deduce, through reason, that it is true without the need for human experience. A posteriori however concerns things which require experience in order to deduce, such as the stove is hot when turned on. Thus if anything these new findings, although they were true before discovered, fall under the a posteriori category, as it relies on human experience and not reason alone as part of the deductive process.