Scientists! True or False; you can't disprove a negative?

Question

Scientists! True or False; you can't disprove a negative?

Answer 1

It can be false if you are able to account for every case. Imagine I have a box containing six yellow balls. I can show the negative "none of the balls is red" is true by removing them one at a time and checking its color. However, this is unlikely to be possible in most real life situations since an exhaustive inventory is seldom possible, as described above

Answer 2

True, as positive evidence may turn up in the future.  For example, there's presently no known evidence whatsoever showing Britain has an endemic population of pixies.  However, there could be a family of them living in a mushroom in a village outside of Blackburn or Brighton.  I can't demonstrate that isn't the case.

Answer 3

False, I could present the negative claim: There are no Cocker Spaniels.  This is easily disproved by presenting one.  I think what you mean (unless you're just trying to fool us) is that you can't PROVE a negative.  If I say, there's no Lock Ness Monster, lack of evidence doesn't prove my claim but it is certainly strengthened by lack of evidence provided by scientific inquiry

Answer 4

TRUE because scientists are intended to prove the questionable things..,..Your question is tricky but it can't trick me...