- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Oct 03, 2024
- Thu Mar 27, 2025 1:02 pm
#112432
Hi miriamson!
Let's break down our Astronomer's conclusion. We can sum it up as follows: there is good reason to believe that [these proponents'] hypothesis is false, because they don't provide any support for their theory of extraterrestrial life. Rather, these proponents only give evidence as to why an alternative view (the view that life evolved on earth) is false.
The issue here is that the Astronomer himself doesn't provide any evidence as to why the proponents' theory is false. Rather, he equates the fact that there isn't any concrete evidence in favor of their hypothesis to there being concrete evidence against their hypothesis. A lack of evidence for something does not equal evidence against something. The proponents could well be right that life came to earth in the form of extraterrestrial forms, and evidence just has not been found for it yet.
The proponents' hypothesis could also be false, however, the Astronomer does not provide any valid reasoning to indicate this (i.e. an inherent contradiction, direct evidence against it, etc.).
I hope this helps!
Let's break down our Astronomer's conclusion. We can sum it up as follows: there is good reason to believe that [these proponents'] hypothesis is false, because they don't provide any support for their theory of extraterrestrial life. Rather, these proponents only give evidence as to why an alternative view (the view that life evolved on earth) is false.
The issue here is that the Astronomer himself doesn't provide any evidence as to why the proponents' theory is false. Rather, he equates the fact that there isn't any concrete evidence in favor of their hypothesis to there being concrete evidence against their hypothesis. A lack of evidence for something does not equal evidence against something. The proponents could well be right that life came to earth in the form of extraterrestrial forms, and evidence just has not been found for it yet.
The proponents' hypothesis could also be false, however, the Astronomer does not provide any valid reasoning to indicate this (i.e. an inherent contradiction, direct evidence against it, etc.).
I hope this helps!