Earlier quoted context omitted.
> First, an argument that can only be falsified by running an experiment that involves the armed overthrow of the government is not really in the spirit of "falsifiability". I disagree entirely. Ideas are either falsifiable or not. An idea is not unfalsifiable because the experiment required to test it is expensive beyond some M. Real physicists discuss and publish theories that are impossible to test with current le…
I'm a little lost. If it's unlikely to have happened here, why was it brought up in the first place? What's the relevance to this thread? The request you're referring to isn't mine; it's 'specialp's. It's in response to this comment (in its entirety): My guess is he plead guilty under advisement his case was hopeless. There's a significant likelihood evidence necessary to aide his case is locked away deep inside the…
I don't care about that. I just thought your assessment of an earlier statement as unfalsifiable was wrong and I responded to it.
>Which is an even less falsifiable argument than the specific one we're debating!
It seems equally falsifiable and falls under my earlier test.
Again, falsifiability is a binary condition, not a spectrum. Something either has the potential to be empirically determined, and is falsifiable, or cannot.