Simulation Theory according to Dilbert

[John V]

If this was an example of a falsified prediction among many successful predictions, then yeah, you could call that science. But that's not the case. Paleontology is better considered as history rather than science.

You do understand that one of the most basic tenets of science is it's claims/ideas/theories are all falsifiable, and that's how science works, right? 

And that's why paleontology isn't science. It doesn't make risky, falsifiable predictions.