Creation Myths: A chat with Michael Behe on Irreducible Complexity

Conversation
,
16

This is what I mean: Does Science Work by Falsifiability?

There is a distinction between saying:

  1. The hypothesis is not falsifiable so it is not scientific.

  2. The scientist is diligently seeking to falsify the hypothesis.

#1 is not a good description of how science works, and that is what Popper meant by falsifiability. In contrast, #2 could be a correct (partial) description of good science. As for negative controls, ID could choose to use negative controls if they wanted, e.g.

  1. https://peacefulscience.org/covid-19-created-designed/

  2. https://peacefulscience.org/cancer-evolution/

The fact that they don’t usually specify negative controls (in biology) isn’t intrinsic to their hypothesis, and just speaks to a deficiency in their methodology.