Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 226:
Line 226: + +
→Reversion Anticipated: This thread should be called →falsifiability
::::::::Point. Are you talking about the old debate with KSorenson here, where I pointed out, "So, we don't know that black holes do exist - that claim isn't falsifiable; we'd need to survey every <s>square</s>'''cubic''' millimeter of space and say 'there isn't a black hole here!'"? It seems that's a somewhat academic point: you could just as well say, "The existence of Jack Smith isn't falsifiable; you'd need to survey every square millimeter of the earth and say 'he isn't here'". If you want to say their existence isn't falsifiable because of that, be my guest but please explain the reason in the article. --[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 10:49, 1 December 2009 (EST)
::::::::Point. Are you talking about the old debate with KSorenson here, where I pointed out, "So, we don't know that black holes do exist - that claim isn't falsifiable; we'd need to survey every <s>square</s>'''cubic''' millimeter of space and say 'there isn't a black hole here!'"? It seems that's a somewhat academic point: you could just as well say, "The existence of Jack Smith isn't falsifiable; you'd need to survey every square millimeter of the earth and say 'he isn't here'". If you want to say their existence isn't falsifiable because of that, be my guest but please explain the reason in the article. --[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 10:49, 1 December 2009 (EST)
::::::::The theory that extraterrestials might exist is a special case of scientific theory, with the burden of proof being on the proponents. They must produce one, or concede that they are just hoping. There's a longstanding battle between materialists and religious people about a number of scientific issues, and the [[burden of proof]] is often inconsistent. Is [[evolution]] falsifiable? What sort of evidence would make its proponents give up? (Note: if there is no way they would ever concede being wrong, then they are not engaged in [[science]] but in [[propaganda]]. This is a very serious point.) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 11:01, 1 December 2009 (EST)