"George Hammond" <research137@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:...
"Virgil" <ITSnetNOTcom/virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote in message
news:ITSnetNOTcom/virgil-AE9C96.17010601062004@[63.218.45.211]...
In article <NE4vc.32104$eY2.4993@attbi_s02>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Jim Jastrzebski wrote:
To falsify the theory you need only to prove that God is not
caused by the curvature of psychometric space as it is
postulated in Hammond's theory.
Your understanding of what requires falsification is 100% bass
ackwards,
knucklehead. In science, it is not the theory, "There might be an
invisible X" that requires falsification, it is the null, "There is no
X" that requires falsification.
It depends on whose question one is begging.
To falsify any theory one needs contrary evidence. But to validate any
theory, one needs supportive evidence. A total absence of evidence
either way proves nothing either way.
[Hammond]
Hammond's theory is FULLY CONFIRMED
by 100 years of experimental evidence. QED
While it is customary to PRESUME that a theory without support is false,
this is no more that a presumption, and presumptions are neither truths
nor knowledge.
[Hammond]
Hammond's theory is FULLY CONFIRMED
by 100 years of experimental evidence. QED
====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
====================================
.
