If that isn't correct, then explain why not? Proof is a very high bar to pass, isn't it.
Here I have a theory. Weakened infectious organisms can be injected into a person and it will make them immune to the disease the organism causes. Of course it can never be proved, right?
Are you claiming that in all cases, injections with a weakened infectious organism will make them immune to that organism? Please do a little research and you will find that your theory is not correct in all cases. Falsified.
I have another theory. It is possible for humans to fly in machines that are heavier than air. Can’t be proved though, right?
As a pilot I happen to know that an airplane must constantly displace its weight in air, in straight and level flight. If the plane doesn't displace its weight in air (becoming heavier than the air it displaces) it is no longer capable of sustained flight. Hence I have falsified your theory.
I have another. One day men will be able to fly to the moon and back. Of course science cannot prove that?
Do you know the difference between and observation and a theory? Obviously not. Do you even understand the definition of a theory?
“According to you, every time I drop a ball that is ‘proving’ Newton’s law.”
Not according to me, my friend, since I never said it, nor thought it.
“Are you claiming that in all cases, injections with a weakened infectious organism will make them immune to that organism?”
You just love putting thoughts in people’s minds and words in their mouths that were never there. I’m claiming what you know perfectly well. There was great resistance to the idea of vaccination until Jenner proved it’s feasibility. Are you claiming that the possibility of vaccination has never been proven?
“As a pilot I happen to know that an airplane must constantly displace its weight in air, in straight and level flight. If the plane doesn’t displace its weight in air (becoming heavier than the air it displaces) it is no longer capable of sustained flight. Hence I have falsified your theory.”
You may be a pilot but you know nothing about physics. A plane does not “displace it’s weight” (that’s the concept of boyancy, which might work for baloons, but not heavier than air fligh). A planes wing actually creates a force called “lift” (due to the partial vacuum above the wing) a vector force which is opposite the vector gravitational force due to its mass (weight). The plane never weighs any less (except for the immeasurable amount due to its distance from the earth). The only thing you’ve falsified is your wrong theory of flight.
“Do you know the difference between and observation and a theory? Obviously not. Do you even understand the definition of a theory?”
Before there was any space-flight there were countless “scientific papers” presenting “theories” (actually hypotheses) that “proved” space flight was impossible, that enough “lift” could never be produced, etc. etc. There were other theories that suggested space flight was possible, which according to you, could never be proved.
Just exactly what to you think proof is? And how could anything be proved without observation?
Why are you so eager to prove you cannot know anything. By they way, you have completely convince me.