GaryGaulin
Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012
|
From:
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....y216034
| Quote (Texas Teach @ Feb. 02 2013,18:51) | | The usual mad-on for falsification, plus a bonus. He seems to think that falsification is unnecessary because you can only use to prove false theories false. This is similar to afdave's problems with the idea. Gary doesn't seem to get that falsifiable isn't the same as false, and thinks it's better to just look for "incoherence" in ideas to tell whether they're true or not. Some of us realize it's possible to write a completely logically coherent idea that is dead wrong. |
Texas Teach just proved that they have been teaching what university level science educators now consider to be a "myth".
| Quote | Black_Rose - Thursday, January 15, 2015 2:45:00 PM
How about the myth of Popperian falsification? |
| Quote | Laurence A. Moran - Thursday, January 15, 2015 3:58:00 PM
Yeah. That too. |
| Quote | Joe FelsensteinThursday, January 15, 2015 4:23:00 PM
Popperian falsification is believed by many biologists to be the basis all inference in biology. But in molecular phylogenetics the data are a stochastic outcome of random processes. There is no outcome of the data that is absolutely impossible, no matter what the hypothesis. So the whole framework of Popperian falsification collapses.
The same is true in other disciplines, as long as there is some random noise in the observations.
Popperian falsification has, in effect, been falsified. Most philosophers of science know this, but many biologists haven't got the news. |
http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2015.......6378745
--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
|
