Talk:Falsifiability/Archive1

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive page, last updated 11 May 2016. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:   , (new)(back)

Consistent[edit]

09:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)Mcc1789 (talk)Sorry- I accidentally reverted my changes, but then restored them. -EricB 15:18, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

You might want to make sure that this article remains consistent with our article Scientific theory. :-) --Bobbing up 15:38, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Shall we need a little note saying falsifiability is not the same as fakeability? I personally think it could be useful, because in Romance languages like French or Spanish, "falsificabilité" / "falsificabiildad" means "fakeability", and the cognate might be confusing for native speakers of these languages. Just saying :3 -- 157.159.40.81 (talk) 02:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Not true[edit]

Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ does not endorse this website because there is nothing in the Holy Bible that says he does

well that was easy.PandaLover (talk) 19:24, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I assume you picked this random location to make that comment because recent changes has no talk page? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:31, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Bad choice of term.[edit]

Why is falsifiability called what it is? I have had several occasions (including with myself) where the underlying point behind the term was lost because like the above user said falsifiability sounds like 'fakeability'. Why can't it be something a term that non-scientists could understand like 'Disprovability' or something? - Lago 9:59 AM, 27AUG10 (CST)

Blame Popper. I'm not a personal fan of his opinions because I don't hold falsifiability as the absolute-be-all-and-end-all of science. But if people confuse it with "fakability" that's probably their problem misunderstanding the concept behind the word, rather than a problem with the term itself. Scarlet A.pngd hominem 17:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)