Display title | Sharpshooter Fallacy |
Default sort key | Sharpshooter Fallacy |
Page length (in bytes) | 4,447 |
Namespace ID | 0 |
Page ID | 43032 |
Page content language | en - English |
Page content model | wikitext |
Indexing by robots | Allowed |
Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
Counted as a content page | Yes |
Number of subpages of this page | 1 (0 redirects; 1 non-redirect) |
Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
Delete | Allow all users (infinite) |
Page creator | prefix>Import Bot |
Date of page creation | 21:27, 1 November 2013 |
Latest editor | Robkelk (talk | contribs) |
Date of latest edit | 20:02, 4 August 2023 |
Total number of edits | 15 |
Recent number of edits (within past 180 days) | 0 |
Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description ) This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | A way of fiddling statistics where you don't establish the conditions until after you've "proved" them. The prototypical example is of a person shooting a gun at a wall, then painting a target around the bullet-hole, and claiming to have scored a bullseye.
Karl Popper summed up this fallacy as applied to science with "A theory that explains everything, explains nothing". Basically, if any possible outcome could be interpreted as supporting the theory then it is useless. Which is the pretty much the same thing as the concept of falsifiability. |