Quote:
Originally Posted by ATKINS
One further “argument” of Nereid’s leaves one speechless for its sheer brazen cheek:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nereid
Here's one thing (among many) that surprised me (as I hope I showed, above): almost nothing in the PDF is falsifiable, even in principle!"
|
and
Quote:
|
the so-called [Deep Impact ] predictions are so qualitative as to be all but impossible to find incorrect. Less charitably, one could say that the ECM cannot be falsified, even in principle, by any observational results." !!!
|
[...]
By contrast, the ECM is entirely falsifiable, both “in principle” and in reality, by observation. [...] We have another six years to wait but I am confident that the ECM will either be confirmed or be falsified by the images and measurements Rosetta will acquire. The model is 100% falsifiable.
[snip] |
(emphasis added)
Please provide references to papers, published in relevant peer-reviewed journals, where details of this "
ECM" may be found.
Alternatively, please present "
[t]he model" in quantitative form, here in BAUT's ATM section. Please pay particular attention to presenting it in a form other than the conventions/tradition of "
vulgarizetion of complex scientific theory".