Originally Posted by
Koyote
A scientific hypothesis must be formulated in a manner that makes it falsifiable. The researcher’s job is to try to disprove it… And if the researcher is unsuccessful, the hypothesis is tentatively accepted. And then other researchers will try to disprove it. Rinse and repeat.
Your example involving the particle would have been formulated along these lines.
I think what is happening is that the anti-planing crowd have decided that Heine's conjecture rises to the level of hypothesis - so they can then bash it.
But planing isn't a hypothesis - it is an observation. It might have a little amateur experimentation attached to it, but the fact that it isn't a solid hypothesis to appropriately test doesn't invalidate the observation or the confirmation of those observations.