Do Supernatural Beings Exist?

Do Supernatural Beings exist?
We don't yet know.
Can we know?
Of course, but it may take time.
What shall we do while waiting?
Propose hypotheses.
Then test the hypotheses using logic, reason, and available evidence.
What hypotheses?
Two are possible.
One is valid.
The other is invalid.

What is a valid hypothesis?
One for which a single instance of evidence to the contrary falsifies it.
A valid hypothesis is falsifiable.

What is an invalid hypothesis?
One for which an infinity of evidence to the contrary cannot falsify it.
An invalid hypothesis is unfalsifiable.

The two hypotheses?
1. That Supernatural Beings exist, and
2. That Supernatural Beings do not exist.

Hypothesis 1- that Supernatural Beings exist- is provable but unfalsifiable.
An infinity of evidence for their non-existence cannot falsify it.

Hypothesis 2- that Supernatural Beings do not exist- is unprovable but easily falsifiable and is, therefore, the one valid hypothesis.
A single, and necessarily incontrovertible *, instance of their existence falsifies it.

* Incontrovertible in the sense that the evidence must be manifest to ALL observers regardless of prejudice. So-called miracles and the supposed infallibility of texts, popes, imams, rabbis, shamans, priests, and parents are inadmissible as evidence because none is recognized universally by ALL the world.

What can we do?
We can wait, trusting in Hypothesis 2, for its eventual falsification.
We have waited through vast ages of millions of years during which time no such evidence has been forthcoming.
The longer we wait the more probable Hypothesis 2 becomes.

So, in the meantime, do Supernatural Beings exist?
Probably not.

The Conservation of Energy

There is a parallel here in the scientific principle of the Conservation of Energy.
The hypothesis: "That the total energy (and mass) of the Universe- or of any closed system within it- is constant, no energy (or mass) being created or destroyed in any of the processes of Nature."
This hypothesis is unprovable but is falsifiable: a single demonstrated instance of non-conservation would show it to be false.
In the long and rigorous history of science no such instance has ever been found thus leading, ever increasingly, to belief in the principle even though it is (I believe) unprovable in itself.

Its invalid converse: "That the total energy is not conserved...", is provable but unfalsifiable. It can be proven by demonstrating some (as yet never found) inconstancy, but no amount of contrary evidence- i.e., demonstrating conservation- can falsify it.

Is the Theory of Evolution Correct?

Is the Theory of Evolution correct?
We suspect that it is.
Can we find out?
Of course, but it may take time.
What shall we do while waiting?
Propose hypotheses.
Then test the hypotheses using logic, reason, and available evidence.
What hypotheses?
Two are possible.
One is valid.
The other is invalid.

What is a valid hypothesis?
One for which a single instance of evidence to the contrary falsifies it.
A valid hypothesis is falsifiable.

What is an invalid hypothesis?
One for which an infinity of evidence to the contrary cannot falsify it.
An invalid hypothesis is unfalsifiable.

The two hypotheses?
1. That Evolution is false, and
2. That Evolution is correct.

Hypothesis 1- that Evolution is false- is provable but unfalsifiable.
An infinity of evidence for Evolution's correctness cannot falsify it.
Hypothesis 2- that Evolution is correct- is unprovable but falsifiable and is, therefore, the one valid hypothesis.
A single, and necessarily incontrovertible, instance of its error falsifies it.

What can we do?
We can wait, trusting in Hypothesis 2, for its eventual falsification.
We have waited through vast ages of millions of years during which time no such evidence has been forthcoming.
The longer we wait the more probable Hypothesis 2 becomes.

So, in the meantime, is Evolutionary theory true?
Very probably.