[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Disparaging Popper



<And I would like to see more theoretical papers
(and that includes phylogeny) include explicit predictions for the fossil
record (and yes, my research on bird flight origins will have explicit
predictions).>

For what it's worth, I agree with you.
I would like to ask what sort of predictions you will make.  If, as I guess,
you'd say that an animal with certain characteristics will be found in a
geographic area and dating from a specific time, then wouldn't the
likelihood of confirming your hypothesis be the likelihood of finding such a
fossil?
Physics and other fields do make predictions which are impossible to test
immediately.  There are hypotheses which do not at present seem possible to
test.  Should these hypotheses be considered in a different category from
those which are subject to the predictive component of the scientific method
as soon as they are issued for review by other scientists?
I'm wondering if this class of hypotheses might be considered a
qualitatively different science?
Thanks for clarifying this.