> The notion of falsifiability, which is the cornerstone of science, > can be formalized in such a way that it can be made the cornerstone > of mathematics, and it is eminently reasonable to do so; if we don't > accept falsifiability as part of the underlying logic of our > mathematics,
Falsifiability, in the guise of reductio ad absurdum *is* a principle of mathematics. As no contradiction in ZFC has been found, we can continue to work within it
> then our mathematics is deficient as a language for > science.
It is not the purpose of mathematics to be a "logic for science".
> ZFC is crackpot mathematics.
Please provide a contradiction in ZFC, or else hold your peace.