Good Scientific Theories

A good scientific theory should have these characteristics:

1. You should be able to prove the theory false. It does not matter if you think it is false or not, but can you prove it false.
2. The results of the theory has to be repeatable. This rules out any chance or flukey results.
3. The more simpler the theory the more ring of truth it has (Occam's razor). That is the theory's explanation should not be overly complicated.

Let's say your theory is "My dog Molly, a German Shepard, can read my mind." This is a theory you can prove false. If you think a command to Molly and she does not do it then all indications is that the theory is false. Of course, you would not want to do the experiment when she is sleeping or eating. And you want to make sure she cannot sense you in any other way to rule out other contaminating factors.

The "Molly" theory can also be repeatable. If she can read your mind on Tuesday she should be able to read your mind on Thursday or any other day of the week.

As for Occam's razor, it depends on if you prove the "Molly" theory in the first place, and state a simple explanation for it. How does Molly read your mind? That is the tricky part.

Notice you state "Molly can read my mind." Not that "Molly can read someone else's mind." Or that "Any dog can read my mind." They are separate conjectures that have to be proven true or false. If you state "Molly can read anyone's mind." Then you have to have someone else think commands to Molly. The problem here is that Molly already has to be able to respond to spoken commands from other people. Otherwise, you might get a false negative.

If Molly can read your mind, what does that say about telepathy? That is a real phenomena worthy of further study. The theory does not prove that any dog can read minds not just yours. The theory cannot prove that other German Shepards read minds--Molly might just be a one-of-a-kind telepathic dog. Like I said further study needs to be done.