I. Q test! Do you understand what an unfalsifiable hypothesis is?

[Juxtapose]

I will provide the answer in an update.

[richardcory]

Yes. Its just as it says, a hypothesis (theory) that cannot be proven false. For example "invisible little green men are always watching us, but there is no way to ever detect then". OK, it could be true, but there is not way to prove it isn't.

Most modern religions fall into this category. That doesn't mean they are untrue, just that they cannot be tested with the scientific method

[TheSpaceGnome]

Nearly all modern religions are verifiably false. This is what I meant by "A lot of times it gets misused though, in situations where you can in fact prove it false." Anything involving omnipotence or creationism is false.

The problem with deeming something unfalsifiable, is the person making the statement is almost never knowledgeable enough to know whether or not it is falsifiable.

Lets take the "invisible little green men always watching us" example, you can prove thats not true just on the grounds that it is impossible for anything to constantly watch everything on a planet.

[LiamJHayden]

@TheSpaceGnome "Anything involving omnipotence or creationism is false."

You must now prove this dogmatic statement in order for others to accept it.

[TheSpaceGnome]

@LiamJHayden I did multiple times already on here.

Can god create something so heavy that god cannot lift it?
If yes, god has strength limits, if no, god has creation limits.
It has to be a yes or a no, so omnipotence is impossible because opposites exist, therefor an omnipotent being cannot exist.

Creationism implies that something needs to be created to exist, but this logic is flawed, because if something needs to be created to exist, then nothing would exist, as nothing would be there to create the second thing to exist (ie a god would have needed to be created to exist too, and the thing that created god, and what created that, and that, and that, backwards infinitely, defeating the idea that there was even a begining, let alone that it was created).

Also, since the definition of the universe is everything to ever exist anywhere, it has to be infinite in size, as anything beyond anything would still be part of the universe, and infinitely sized things can't be created, as anything that gets created would start out small and grow, but never reach an infinite size. Growing infinitely also defys the laws of thermodynamics, so it had to simply never have had a begining, which means it can't have been created.

[TheSpaceGnome]

Souls also can't exist, because mental capacity diminishes when the brain/nervous system are damaged, overwhelmed, diseased or obstructed. Things like intoxication, or dementia, mean that thought is tied to organs, not souls. If you had a soul, then you couldn't get mental impairment, because your soul would be your mind. You also would not need to evolve a body, let alone one with a brain/nervous system and sensory organs. We evolve those because without them, we can't think, see, hear, feel, smell, etc. But souls/ghosts are the idea that you can have thought and senses without a body, which as I just stated, is proven impossible.

[LiamJHayden]

@TheSpaceGnome Wrong. Unlimited power does not mean the contradictory suddenly becomes possible. Not sure who taught you this "logic" but he or she should have the teaching credential or tenure revoked.

[TheSpaceGnome]

So just with those 3 things proven impossible, it makes most religions also impossible, as most religions involve omnipotent beings, souls, afterlife realms, and a finite universe.

Most of them also depict events or timelines that are falsifiable, like how abrahamic religions say the earth is much younger than the fossil evidence and very old living trees amd rocks prove. Or they claim physics defying feats, but defying physics is a bit like defying code in a game, if its even possible to break physics, doing so would crash it all.

[TheSpaceGnome]

@LiamJHayden Sorry but you are incorrect, pretty much every physicist has a mathematical model backing up what is common sense, omnipotence implies you can do everything, but the ability to do one thing inhibits others, ie opposites exist so omnipotence can't. I'm correct, but if you can't comprehend what I'm saying, there isn't much I can do about it, which leads back to my original point on knowkedge limits, most people do not know enough to know what is or isn't falsifiable.

[TheSpaceGnome]

Also no one gave me lessons, I figured this out on my own, as did most people interested enough in science.

[TheSpaceGnome]

knowledge*

[LiamJHayden]

@TheSpaceGnome No, it doesn't. It implies that one can do anything that is logically possible. A and not A cannot logically exist at the same time and in the same relationship. There cannot definitionally be a married bachelor, for example. A redefinition of the term to include absurdities is a semantic trick.

[TheSpaceGnome]

@LiamJHayden Your example is a false equivalency, and your initial sentence contradicts your point, and supports mine.

[TheSpaceGnome]

Also, yes it does imply what I said.

[richardcory]

@TheSpaceGnome Most religions are pretty slippery. If you point out something in a holy book that is impossible, it will become an allegory or some such.

[TheSpaceGnome]

Allegory is a useful tool for explaining why something is impossible. I think what you are trying to say is religious people will twist the definitions of words or use circular reasoning to try to ingore logic, and yes, I'm aware.

[Telekinetic-Potato]

This is when a hypothesis cannot be proven false. It's usually a syntax error of sorts where the working could be better but it's not considered a "real" hypothesis if it falls under this category.

[Lliam]

It's a common fallacy. Claiming that something is true because it can't be proven to be false. Like the existence of gods, or aliens from Nibiru, or the accuracy of horoscope.

[Astarlessnightsky]

A scientific statement you can't disprove (or prove).

[TheSpaceGnome]

It means you cannot prove a guess is false.

A lot of times it gets misused though, in situations where you can in fact prove it false.

[CaptainSmartass]

Its a theory that you can't prove wrong. For example, people haven't seen me and Batman in the same room. Therefore, I'm Batman.

Simples...

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

One that can't be tested. Therefore can't be proven true or false.
A good example of this is Russell's teapot

[OddBeMe]

Yeah, the inability to disprove your answer, which means it’s bullshit.

[Exterminatore]

A hypothesis that cannot be proven to be wrong.

[Justneedtokno]

An unproven educated guess

[Justneedtokno]

Unfalsifiable it has yet to be proven to be wrong hypothesis educated guess

[clampfan101]

Sounds like a guess that can’t be proven wrong.

[FictionalCharacter]

True lies