How do you prove an outlandish statement is not true?

Question

If there is no proof that a statment is true. how do you inturn proove its not? Being a scientist I have never heard of this type of logic. the fact that something is not based in fact is the proof that its not true. Am I missing something here?

example: an answer to my question about statements...

I suggest you take another approach to this. Assume that each one of these is correct and go out and try and disprove them.

What if you found only one to be true? Remember, Clinton was impeached for one "tiny" infraction that was more about his personal life than what he was doing as a president.should he then be impeached? What if half are true?? what if all are true?

Answer 1

if you don't want to accept any of the information provided to you, why not just go with what the American people want? you know, the old government of the people, by the people , and for the people. click on the link to see what the people want.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/
*****
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/21945/

"Downing Street Memo"
"United States Constitution"

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/20/conservative-scholars-argue-bush%E2%80%99s-wiretapping-is-an-impeachable-offense/

The point here is not that Bush should be kicked out of office, the point I am trying to make is that there is enough information that would warrant an investigation in which Bush be sworn in and facts be discussed. If he is so innocent, why are all Republicans so afraid of the process????

**************************************
Here's one for you Cappy: I believe in God. You can't prove or disprove that. Yet I don't imagine you would make such a big deal of that.


http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/powersurge_healy_lynch.pdf

Answer 2

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - is quoted in a sherlock holmes mystery as saying something to the affect of. "First eliminate the impossible then whatever remains, no matter how improbable must be the truth."
I'm not sure this at all answered your question just a thought.
I read that a couple days ago and have been waiting for the opportunity to use it.

I've always found it better to start without assumptions to the truth or untruth of a matter and merely explore it. Isn't that more how the scientific method goes. Though with matters such as you provided in your examples one always starts with an opinion. and proof of anything either way can be found.

Answer 3

well i usually don't agree with you on much but i will say this... you can never truly prove or disprove anything... just because you take 100 reindeer and throw them off the top of a building and watch them go splat on the ground doesn't mean that on Christmas 8 tiny reindeer don't go flying around the world... you can form probably truths.. and time has proved that even these probable truths are very often proved wrong.

Answer 4

Cause + Effect = Intentionality. What is your basis for disproving an outlandish statement? What is at the core of your defining it as outlandish? What resinates within you that you believe requires this "outlandish statement" be disproven?

Answer those things and perhaps you will arrive at the answer that your desire is not to disprove the outlandish statement, but deny something within yourself.

Answer 5

First you gather all the facts.
Next you weed the unbelievable facts out.
Then you weigh the facts for and against and see which outweighs the other.
and lastly, as proof, you present the facts that outweighed the other.