In order for something to be proven scientifically does it have to be observed?

Question

I am just wondering because I heard somewhere that it did

Answer 1

It needs lot of fallow up .I am the one issued the warning based on observed scientific fact on 26th Dec 2004 two hours before Tsunami struck our coast. I am doing research work in early warning system for earthquake from the past seven years. The earthquake alarm designed by me just for a cost of about U.S. $ 25 can give the warning at the initial stage of sensing the primary wave. The concept was accepted by Californian scientists. But our meteorological department refused to accept the usage of this instrument. On the day of Tsunami my earthquake alarm gave the warning for 12 minutes. I am located at about 2050 K/M from Sumatra. As I know the concept of Richter scale I was able to understand the earthquake sensed by my instrument must be very big in magnitude and from long distance. That day was full moon day. The book by name Earthquakes author Mr. Bruce A Bolt says like this. “ Stay away from beaches and water front areas where Tsunami may attack long after the shaking is stopped" I spoke about Tsunami in Singapore radio 9 months before it attacked us. All my knowledge and circumstances helped me to issue the warning to local T.V.stations 2 hours before Tsunami struck our coast. But even after explaining about all my knowledge people at T.V.stations refused to broad cast the alert message. Now I am in first ten to give top answer in yahoo for earth science and geology. Several scientist and seismologist appreciated my instrumental mechanism to fore warn the earthquakes. But meteorological department is not showing the interest to find the fact and use of my life saving equipments.

Answer 2

No, it can be proven by either direct observation or by objective evidence.