undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbeefield9y ago0 comments

I know nothing about palaeontology. Can you give an example of unfalsifiable claim of palaeontology?

Yes, classical physics is a simplification, but it is a _falsifiable_ simplification, unlike the utility maximizer.

Note that falsifiability has nothing to do with making experiments.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

berntb9y ago· 2 in thread

Experiments are generally needed to "falsify" claims in physics, chemistry etc. Those are experimental sciences, which can use the scientific method. Mathematics et al can falsify "on paper".

Palaeontology, economics and many other sciences can't do either. Why can you dismiss one out of hand, but not the others?

(I have written this quite obvious point 3-4 times now.)

Edit: Your own wikipedia reference have a link to the "scientific method". You should read it. Well worth the trouble. It is arguable the basis for most everything we know about the world.

beefieldOP9y ago

To be honest, I do not know what you mean by scientific method and I have not made any claims about scientific method. I have made a distinction based falsifiability. Falsifiability does not need experiments, but _observations_.

You have written your "obvious" point now a few times, but you have not written a single unfalsifiable claim of palaeontology or any of the many other sciences you claim that exists.

My hypothesis is simple, _anything_ that claims being a science but makes unfalsifiable claims, is quackery. You see, this hypothesis itself is falsifiable, all you need to make is give a single unfalsifiable claim of a respectful science to prove this hypothesis false. So can you give _one_ example of palaeontology that is unfalsifiable?

(Mathematics does not claim to be a science in popperian sense.)

berntb9y ago

It is good to look up the scientific method before arguing about Popper.

(Hint: It is in the first sentence of the second paragraph on Popper's wikipedia page. Also, your own link had the term as a related link.)

Enough for me, bye.

Edit: Another hint, Popper was amongst others professor of "logic and scientific method" at the University of London. It is also noted on his Wikipedia page. In short, you argue Popper without understanding what Popper argued about.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse