Reply
Tue 14 Sep, 2004 10:58 pm
This is a statement written out by a friend of mine
My Theory
"Man has not Landed on the moon"
New evidence...finding A lunar lander (perhaps through a powerful telescope) does not mean my theory becomes ad hoc because i allow for the possibility that it was put later by the U.S.
he wrote this out and askd me to send it to an expert after i said it seemed like an example of a Popperian ad hoc theory, and he said it wasn't, in any way shape or form, please tell me if you think his theory is ad hoc. be as kind or as candid as you wish in reponse to this argument.
Cheers mark
I'd think you were weaseling out on falsifiability - and in breach of Occom's Razor!
And welcome to A2k, Mark Harding!
Just for future reference, Forum Help is aspecial area to post questions about problems you are having with A2k - you know, like if you are having problems logging in or some such thing. This question might be more at home in Philosophy and Debate......
Edit: Or in science and mathematics - and lo, a kindly Moderator has moved it there....
your "proofs" would be invalid. An earthbound telescope would give pictures having no depth of field and would be from a elevational perspective. An expert could out that easily.
What about the actual rocket launch? How did we manufacture evidence when thousands of people stood around and gawked when the rocket took off.
The people in the denial business are just rather simple folks who dont understand the meaning of DATA. In order for a fake moon landing to have been pulled off, we would have had to launch a real moon landing just to provide the world with accurate radio tracking data, otherwise some wag in Russia would have recognized that this was a fake.
PS , Poppers "falsifiability" as a credo of science is not too well thought out either.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace