I'm sorry. It was a little bit too low. However, if it's in the same sort of vein, maybe I can go back to how I would interpret both of these types of knowledge.
At the heart of western science is the scientific method. The scientific method proposes a hypothesis and it suggests a firm methodology. Then it tries very much to isolate, to the best it can, a cause and an effect: “We did this, and therefore this happened.” By definition, then, the scientific method is a narrowing of our knowledge so that we understand one thing very well.
Indigenous knowledge, generally, if you can say it this way, is exactly the opposite: It proposes a look at a system and how everything is in relation to other things in the system. Instead of isolating individual actions and reactions, it looks at a broader relationship among elements, either in the natural world or wherever.
That's how I interpret these differences. These are not mutually exclusive concepts; they both can aid each other. I think that's highly advisable as part of this process.