A commentary on Matthew Paris' article in 'The Times':
The BBC isn't Telling Us the Full Story on Covid
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc-isnt-telling-us-the-full-story-on-covid-h2xm35pmh
Examples of an unfalsifiable hypotheses include:
Druids can turn water
into a healing elixir, and it is a spiritual, non material change.
I have fairies at
the bottom of my garden that only I can see.
A rain dance causes rain if performed enough times and in the right way.
In each case there is no test that can be independently replicated that, if the hypothesis is false, could demonstrate that it is actually false. If we cannot know if it is false or not, how can we know if it is true? We can't. We could believe it to be true, but belief is not knowledge. Belief without evidence is faith, superstition even.
Paris highlights that, after lockdown measures,
1. if there is a reduction in infections, BBC will mainly broadcast claims that the lockdown measures were effective,
2. if there is an increase in infections, BBC will mainly broadcast calls for a harder lockdown until a reduction is seen.
This makes the claim that 'lockdown is an effective strategy' an unfalsifiable hypothesis. No outcome can demonstrate that it is false, and we cannot know by this faulty reasoning that the hypothesis - 'lockdown is an effective strategy' - is in fact true.
