Falsifiable: Popper’s much to do about nothing much, and Woit and Smolin as the logically challenged (or two non-experimentalists who have a need for science by consensus)

Indirectly, through Lee Smolin, I finally get Peter Woit’s definition of falsifiable, which is actually nothing much more than the standard nonsensical nonsense that’s summarized by answers.com.
In Smolin on the Anthropic Principle, Woit says,
[Smolin] gives an eloquent explanation of the importance of falsifiability for a shared scientific enterprise.
I can assume, then, that Woit is satisfied [...]

Backreaction reviews the Trouble with Physics

The Trouble With Physics: Aftermath, a review by Backreaction of The Trouble with Physics one year after it was published.

Popperian Falsifiable: back cover

From the back cover of The Logic of Scientific Discovery, by Karl Popper:
Popper recognised that scientific theories are the result of a creative imagination and that the growth of scientific knowledge rests on the doctrine of falsifiability: that only those theories that are testable and falsifiable by observation and experiment are properly open to scientific [...]

Books to look for soft-science info

For some current complaints about soft-science:

Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory And the Search for Unity in Physical Law by Peter Woit
The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, The Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next by Lee Smolin

To get up to speed on falsifiable:

Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of [...]