3 ms·

My issue is: can this model make testable predictions within our lifetimes? It doesn’t seem that way. Even models of the far future and the distance past of th

• nathanmcrae 5y ago
  Yeah, that's an important point, but that seems to be an issue with the subject of study rather than this particular theory. At least their model has very concrete and explicit premises that could be used to reject it. Particularly the 'hard steps' model of evolution: I don't know how widely accepted that is (genuinely don't, it may be accepted) and, if it is in time rejected by the scientific community then that would discredit--if not falsify--the theory.
• thevardanian 5y ago
  The idea that only testable predictions are valid is... short sighted. Seriously considering extraordinary ideas with as much rigor as possible, with the tools available, is something that has propelled science. If not then ideas about the moon would have been dead in the water. If anything this kind of "rationalism" only conceals dogmatic ideas about what is or isn't possible..
  • icapybara 5y ago
    That's not true. It's a basic tenet of science. Even astronomical theories (for which no experiments are possible) are backed up by observation. Scientific theories must be testable. It must be possible to prove them wrong with experiments or observation.
    • VortexDream 5y ago
      Except in many cases, we didn't have the tools or technology to be able to test theories that eventually turned out to match real-world measurements. But the theories existed beforehand anyway and weren't any less science.