Science has evolved like this. What seemed evident five centuries ago is now outdated and what would have been a heresy in antiquity today is blatant evidence.
A scientific process apparently seems a complicated and intricate path with little chance of error and instead it is so simple that it becomes disarming and therefore liable to errors.
If a theory wants to turn into reality it simply has to be demonstrated. But not a single proof is enough, this may be due to chance, to unknown factors, to the incapacity to understand, it must be repeatable.
If am convinced that donkeys are flying and I want to let the world know and to show me shooting a picture of my donkey suspended in the air, I must also know that this is not my ass thrown from a cliff and photographed on the fly while it crashes but that every donkey has the ability to hover in the air or at least mine does (then not all donkeys fly but only mine could be equipped with this unusual ability). In practice, the phenomenon can not be declared real if I am the only one to see it (really or fraudulently). Observability is therefore the first step in a scientific demonstration: if a fact happens it must be observed.
I do not have to succeed, however, you could think that my donkey flights because I inflated it with a very light gas, must be successful anyone who wants to repeat my experience: repeatability. Anyone who repeats the experience in those conditions will get a similar result (or the same, better) to mine.
At the same time every experience must be measurable. Not "span" but in a precise and recognized way.
If I organize the demonstration of the flight of my donkey it is not enough to scream that there has been a slight but sharp upward movement of his paws, it must be possible to measure this displacement and decide whether it can be defined as "flight" or just like a normal movement of the lower limbs, measurability.
"Simple" then. I want to show the world that donkeys have the ability to fly? Just wait for all or most observers to see at least one, that anyone with an ass can fly it and that flight has the characteristics of the flight, one way or another. If I reach these criteria, I have shown my personal conviction by transforming it into a scientific fact. But it is not finished (boring science eh?) And these "bureaucratic delays" also explain why the progress of science is often very slow. In this way I would have shown that a donkey flies: but is it a capacity of all donkeys or what I have seen is a special donkey?
MAQ/June 2018 /176