On one of those internet IQ tests floating around, one of the test items is a statement about truth, and the correct response, according to the test makers, is, in a nutshell, there is no knowing the truth. So, your IQ score goes up if you choose there is no knowing the truth. But there's probably no truth in any of the multiple-choice responses for that test item, so don't sweat it. Not that you were sweating it, but.
Anyway, I've been thinking about this falsifiable problem here for the last couple of days, and I have finally decided I like the word. For instance, in thinking about caffeine intake adversely affecting hydration (cross-thread ref. to I&A), I consider the view of a friend of mine who is a football coach. She says that caffeine is horrible, dehydrates, should not be consumed by athletes, and so on. I pointed out the Nebraska study to her, and she remains adamant about how horrible caffeine is. Well, in my way of thinking the Nebraska study falsified accepted views about caffeine and dehydration. Sure, caffeine is a diuretic, but the two test groups--those who didn't consume caffeine and the others who did--showed very little difference in their levels of hydration. So, I would say the theory about caffeine's adversely affecting levels of hydration in normal, healthy people was falsified, at least by the Nebraska study. And I also think that the Nebraska study at least makes me question the whole caffeine-dehydration issue enough that I would like to see further studies. And, being a biased caffeine addict, I especially want to hear reports of studies that will support my intake of most honorable coffee.
