If i made such a claim, then I was wrong. Falsifiability is distinctly different from verifying. Read the gd wikipedia article on the problem of induction. Verifiability is not the same as falsifiability.
"In order to falsify the theory that a red swan exists you must be able to present the entire set of red swans everywhere in the universe and show that NO red swan exists." No. A red swans exists is a positive claim. It can be shown to be false by failing to observe a red swan. There are no red swans is a negative claim. It can only be shown to be false by observing that no swans are red.
This isn't a matter of belief. I hate Donald Rumsfeld with every ounce of my being, but his claim that "The evidence of absence is not absence of evidence" is accurate, and it is precisely why the concept of falsfiability exists. Of course, had he followed through with the implications of this claim, history might be different.
Iraq does not have WMDs is an unfalsifiable claim. Iraq does have WMDs is a falsifiable claim. These statements are true regardless of our knowledge of Iraqi weapons.
Edited by JMJones0424, 03 May 2018 - 11:10 AM.