Re: Baghdad

On May 26, 9:09 pm, Harlan Messinger
<hmessinger.removet...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Franz Gnaedinger wrote:

If I made things up you could easily falsify my
reconstructions. But you can't,

That doesn't make them true. Why isn't that obvious to you?

Last week I read an article on Karl Poppers
criterium of scientific falsibility. The author
says there are many physical theories that
can't be falsified, and yet they are truly
scientific, while Newton's physical theory
was falsified a long time ago but is still
in use. Falsifying isn't really the way how
the sciences proceed. What actually happens
is that scientists are gathering evidence in
favor of their idea or hypothesis or theory,
and the more evidence there is, the better.
I see it in a similar way, understanding myself
as kind of a surfer riding your waves of
indignation - every snap on the lip of this
wave makes me happy ... (just learned
a couple of surfer terms from TV). Hope
I get through with this message, for I have
a difficult captcha to type, might be glorksuqo.
Well then, glorksuqo, Harlan.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Greek Psi
    ... You still seem not to understand the concept of falsifying, ... assertion was shown false, so it was rejected. ... my question about the root, now you claim to have falsified ... me, and this makes you a real kook, Harlan Messinger. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: The Big Bang is not just a theory
    ... Falsifying a well-tested theory is the biggest achievement that a scientist can make, and thus many scientists are drawn to testing and retesting the best established theories. ... Now the Big Bang picture is well established, but the inflationary scenario added on before events in the classic Big Bang is not well-tested. ...
    (sci.physics)