“David Wojick
Kuhn’s point against Popper is simply that the journals are not full of falsifications. ”
They are if designed, written and review properly. Pretty much every figure I present has a positive and a negative control. Sometimes the controls are are in previous papers, as when one point has been taken as established it is generally resilient.
So Mitotracker Red is a proxy for membrane potential, MitoSOX is a monitor of mitochondrial superoxide. By adding X to cells with one or the other, comparing the output of the, we are falsifying a wide range of hypotheses. Typically not all hypotheses are presented, but MT up Sox down is completely different from the other three combinations.
I think Popper was right on with pretty much everything he wrote on scientific methodology, the history of science and the philosophy of science should be taught to science undergraduates.
↧
Comment on Pseudoscience (?) by DocMartyn
↧