Not exact matches
(particles communicating via telepathy, moving instantaneously across great distances, changing state when observed, taking every available path possible to a destination at the
same time, etc) Tools of normal search are actually a detriment and can lead to
false conclusions.
But when we are presented with the
same pattern over and over again it is easy to fall victim to what is known as confirmation bias, or coming to
false conclusions because the evidence we use does not come from a broad enough sample.
And don't all my stories, true or
false, tend toward the
same conclusion?
The two sentences have been merged together, creating the impression that they were the
same «
conclusion», one we can reject in one go by saying that «it» is
false.
Science is only useful when it asks the right questions, openly tests hypothetical models with honesty and integrity and accepts the
conclusion with the understanding that «not
false» is not the
same «true».