There's a good case for stating the hypothesis, and summarizing the evidence that could falsify the hypothesis, right in the abstract of a paper. Or at least a

There's a good case for stating the hypothesis, and summarizing the evidence that could falsify the hypothesis, right in the abstract of a paper. Or at least a separate section on falsification. Whether the authors' views on the falsification of their prediction are correct or not, they say a lot about their standard of evidence and therefore about their level of rigor. If they state that falsification isn't relevant to this particular paper, or give an impossible threshold, it's a way to sort it into a category other than science.