(August 7, 2019 at 7:47 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:(August 7, 2019 at 7:21 pm)Grandizer Wrote: Again, in what way is the pixies "theory" anything like the atomic theory or the theory(ies) of evolution? What solidly substantiates the pixies "theory" from the evidence we have and the observations we can make? What are the "pawn hypotheses" corresponding to the "theory" (just going by how you wrongly view hypotheses and theories)? What predictions can it make that we can test? How exactly does a "theory" that incorporates fantasy entities be on par with legit scientific theories?
I don't know what predictions it makes, only that there's no reason to assume that it doesn't.
But your question is valid, the predictions are something we want to know. Note that this is different from LFC saying it's not a theory because of evidence. That's an incorrect criteria, even if we assume that it doesn't have evidence. But if it turns out it doesn't make any predictions, that's problematic for falsifiability.
The theory doesn't have to be on par with other theories. I already said it could differ on things like accuracy, and still be a theory.
(August 7, 2019 at 7:24 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: Can you prove their are no space pixies? Go ahead. You have the floor.
Prove there are no space pixies.
We don't prove things in science, sorry. Can you rephrase your request another way?
No. You apparently don't do science or even basic English. I can't help you at that point. You are on your own.
