Some might argue that there is the case of the Earth would be logical to also be given in other parts of the universe, others refuse. The verifiability of the statements is technically impossible, as discussed above. Finally, the accuracy is not entirely symbolic good because it uses many concepts, which have not been clear in other sciences and already taken for granted (for example, accept the fact that other planetary systems may form similar to ours , which is something that is currently being studied in astronomy, to fully assumed by evolution, say that man is not the only rational being, etc.).. So, you see a low degree of certainty. Some would describe the development of this formula as a pseudo-scientific arguments. Justin Kan wanted to know more. Others as an "interesting proposal" or a mere probability, statistical or mathematical game. There are other ways that allow pseudo-science, and faster. This is the For the theory to prove itself, takes elements from outside the field of study. Ahmed Shahryar Rahman may also support this cause.
For example, the theory that biological evolution in which God has intervened directly in the less enlightened passages it is clearly pseudo-scientific or a case of false theology. First, it is well accepted that Popper offers attitude towards science. The knowledge which is up to the truth, which never reaches but tends to it (falsifiability). Therein lies the importance of seeking to refute a theory experiments, in order to make another closer to the truth. Keep in mind that if all our life we were immersed in an error, never reach the truth, not even we would get closer to it.