10th September 2013

“To be valid a hypothesis must be 'falsifiable'. You can't insist that flying saucers exist because nobody can prove that they don't.”

Anon.

2 Responses to “10th September 2013”

  1. Reasonablerob Says:

    Is the hypothesis “To be valid a hypothesis must be ‘falsifiable’.” itself falsifiable? No? In which case it’s a philosophically ignorant, self-contradictory bit of materialist nonsense.

  2. Sinjin Smythe Says:

    Falsifiability or refutability is the trait of a statement, hypothesis, or theory whereby it could be shown to be false if some conceivable observation were true.

    “The criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability.” — Karl Popper

    Creationism is not falsifiable as its proponents base the theory on a human text (the Bible) which provides accounts of creation and other events that cannot be tested by observation or experiment but are instead accepted as infallible truth. This is one of the primary characteristics of pseudoscience.

    Nearly all criticisms of evolution have come from religious sources, rather than from the scientific community.

    Creationism is even dismissed by U.S. courts:
    “Yet it is clearly established in the case law, and perhaps also in common sense, that evolution is not a religion and that teaching evolution does not violate the Establishment Clause”