Falsifiability as a criterion of demarcation of science from nonscience

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WesleyS (Talk | contribs) at 11:27, 21 November 2008. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

Falsification as a necessary precursor to science

The scientific method as described in modern science textbooks requires a rigorous (but general) protocol:

Observation the sun rises in the east and sets in the west

Hypothesis Building the sun is set in a crystal sphere that rotates around the earth from east to west

Predictions of hypothesis the crystal sphere must rotate in a perfect circle. No other object should occupy the sphere. The sun must always rotate east to west.

Hypothesis Testing Do I see a crystal sphere? Does the sun rotate in a perfect circle? Does anything else occupy the same sphere as the sun? Is it always east to west?

Analysis The Moon occupies the same sphere. The Sun does not go east to west above the arctic circle. The sun does not rotate in a perfect circle. I see no crystal sphere. Therefore the sun must not be set in a crystal sphere that rotates from east to west. I must formulate a new hypothesis...

Retest using alternative hypothesis Perhaps the earth rotates around the sun?...

No statements can be made in science that do not follow this general format. Most critically, predictions must be made and tested against a real experimental platform. Without this critical step, a hypothesis cannot be said to have been scientifically tested.