Creationist Appointed As Maine Education Commissioner

[PKT_VOL]

Belief =/= hypothesis. Not even close.

That's not the way science works, or what he was saying. He's saying hypothesis are presented to see if they offer utility to the question. Scientist aren't out to prove the hypothesis (or as you are saying, "belief"), they are out to seek answers if it is true.

Scientists hypothesized (not "believed") that the higgs-boson particle existed, so they spent billions of dollars building the particle accelerator. As a result, they found the particle, confirming the hypothesis.

It didn't confirm the hypothesis, it merely didn't falsify the hypothesis. A correct prediction lends credence as evidence to the veracity of the theory; does not confirm the theory itself though.

But if they didn't find it, it still would have been a success because it would have showed that the particle doesn't exist, and the hypothesis (not "belief") was wrong. That is a fundamental difference being overlooked in this discussion.

Likewise, there are countless ways to falsify theories like evolution. And if they do falsify it, then they regroup, refocus, or even discount the initial hypothesis altogether. And they do it in that same philosophical framework they started with.

It wouldn't have falsified the theory and that was part of the problem.

The prediction was very vague. They were wildly uncertain how to produce, what it would take to produce, how to detect, and the specific weight of the proposed higgs-boson.