Why does it matter that a scientific theory must be "falsifiable"?

CORRECTION: The scientific community value individuals who have good intuition and think up creative explanations that turn out to be correct — but it values scientists who are able to think up creative ways to test a new idea (even if the test ends up contradicting the idea) and who spot the fatal flaw in a particular or test. In science, gathering evidence to determine the accuracy of an explanation is just as important as coming up with the explanation that winds up being supported by the evidence.

More importantly, scientific theories are very important to our everyday lives.

We believe any unbiased reader will realize that we were fair with our treatment of the two models in the table above. Yet, although the theory of evolution matches the facts in some cases, evolution is still an unproven theory. Further, the scientific evidence matches the Bible’s creation account better in most cases. By now, you may believe it should be your first choice also.


Hypothesis vs Theory - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

Even scientists sometimes use the word  when they really mean hypothesis or even just a hunch.

As we wrote in our section, the Bible is not a science book, yet it is scientifically accurate. We are not aware of any scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible. We have additional proof in our section—and more on this page.


Difference between Fact and Theory | Difference Between

There is another radioactive dating method called “fission track dating,” so named because the decay of Uranium 238 creates a minor disruption in the material that scientists call a “track.” Unfortunately, it has results that differ from the other radiometric methods. For example, a rock in Nigeria dated 95 million years old with Potassium-Argon dating, and 750 million years old using Uranium-Helium dating measured only 30 million years old with fission track dating. Do you see how the scientist could control the age reported for the geologic layer by specifying the test method?

What's the difference between Deductive and Inductive

You may be wondering about radiometric (radioactive) dating, which we will examine next. However, you should know that scientists established the geologic time scale and assigned the ages of the fossils in those rock layers before radioactive dating was invented. In essence, the discussion of radioactive dating is a sophisticated way to divert people’s attention from the fact that there is no evidence to support the theory of evolution.

Modern Portfolio Theory Vs. Behavioral Finance | …

Notice that although the layers of the earth were dated using index fossils, the index fossils were dated by guessing their age based on the theory of evolution. This is not science nor a valid application of the scientific method. Suggesting a hypothetical age for a fossil (based on a theory) and then telling everyone it is an established fact is not the way to apply the scientific method. If you quiz paleontologists about this, many will assure you that their techniques are indeed scientific. They will tell you they accurately date the fossil using the date of the rock layer in which they found it.