Quotes About Disprove

Maybe scientists are fundamentalist when it comes to defining in some abstract way what is meant by 'truth'. But so is everybody else. I am no more fundamentalist when I say evolution is true than when I say it is true that New Zealand is in the southern hemisphere. We believe in evolution because the evidence supports it, and we would abandon it overnight if new evidence arose to disprove it.

I am no more fundamentalist when I say evolution is true than when I say it is true that New Zealand is in the southern hemisphere. We believe in evolution because the evidence supports it, and we would abandon it overnight if new evidence arose to disprove it. No real fundamentalist would ever say anything like that.

The best scientists can do is fail to disprove things while pointing to how hard they tried

and we would abandon it overnight if new evidence arose to disprove it. No real fundamentalist would ever say anything like that.

The more energetically and thoroughly you try to disprove a theory, if it survives the assault, the more closely it approaches what common sense happily calls a fact.

So Fancy dreams - Disprove it, if ye can, Ye reas'ners broad awake, whose busy search Of argument, employ'd too oft amiss, Sifts half the pleasures of short life away.

'Ghost Hunters,' they like to go out and disprove everything and just wave a bunch of equipment around for a couple hours.

The case of medicine is, at first sight, rather more intractable than that of astrology, for it is hard to disprove astrology: one would need to compare the lives of a group of people all born at the same moment.

They're called rollerblades, she said. Rollerblades, Daniel said. Right. Well? And you can't rollerblade on grass, she said. Can't you? Daniel said. How very disappointing truth is sometimes. Can't we try? There'd be no point, she said. Can't we try anyway? he said. We might disprove the general consensus. Okay, Elisabeth said.

Many 'hard' scientists regard the term 'social science' as an oxymoron. Science means hypotheses you can test, and prove or disprove. Social science is little more than observation putting on airs.

Science proposes something and then does everything it can to disprove it. Religion is not like that. It proposes something and does everything it can to keep it from being disproved.

You can almost always find chains of coincidence to disprove magic. That's because it doesn't happen the way it does in books. It makes those chains of coincidence. That's what it is.

I like to prove things wrong.

Everyone - male and female - is biased. But no one wants to admit it, so our brains search for examples that disprove the accusation.

You make observations, write theories to fit them, try experiments to disprove the theories and, if you can't, you've got something.

I had set out to disprove quantum field theory - and the opposite occurred! I was shocked.

Science is the only thing that disproves science, and it does it all the time.

Science can destroy religion by ignoring it as well as by disproving its tenets. No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, the nonexistence of Zeus or Thor, but they have few followers now.

I never make exceptions. An exception disproves the rule.

When you look at the calculation, it's amazing that every time you try to prove or disprove time travel, you've pushed Einstein's theory to the very limits where quantum effects must dominate. That's telling us that you really need a theory of everything to resolve this question. And the only candidate is string theory.

Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis: you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory. On the other hand, you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory.

This is, more or less, what the great twentieth-century philosopher of science Karl R. Popper and his followers have called the principle of falsifiability. Science is distinctive, not because it proves true statements, but because it seeks systematically to disprove (falsify) false ones.

Emilio] felt once more the strangely visceral thrill of trying to disprove a hypothesis he suspected was robust.

To say that a scientist can disprove the existence of God is like saying a mechanic can disprove the existence of Henry Ford. It doesn't follow.