Falsifiability (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, December 19, 2014, 00:46 (4224 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

Tony: Pose a question. > Hypothesize an answer. > Design an experiment that would illustrate the predicted results. > Determine criteria that would disprove your answer. > Perform experiment. > Make observations. > If any of the results meet the criteria that would disprove your hypothesis, then it is obviously wrong. > If none of those results happen, then it doesn't mean you are right, only that you got the expected results. (Yes, there is a difference) > > In science, you are never proving anything, you are only disproving things. Therefore, for something to be scientific, it MUST be possible to disprove the hypothesis. Otherwise, it is simply a fallacious argument. -Again, very good points in your list. Another aspect not mentioned in this discussion is reproducibility. Remember the arsenic using fish in mono Lake, California; or the heat produced stem cells; or the gravity waves definitely found through a group at the South Pole? All gone, not reproduced, or refuted by later findings in the Planck satellite.