Miranda has a theory that some people are able to “see the future.” She has tested this theory and found that she is unable to produce an individual with above chance predictions. She revises her theory to explain that when asked about the future, these people are unable to report what they know, but she is still confident that her theory is correct. Why is this theory unacceptable in science? (Points : 1)

It lacks specificity
It is not falsifiable
It is not parsimonious
It is based on empiricism
my answer is it lacks specificity

I think it's the fourth choice.

http://www.dictionary.com Look up "empiricism."

I would tend to go with "not falsifiable." This theory is NOT "based on empiricism," since "she is unable to produce an individual with above chance predictions."

Your answer is correct. The theory presented by Miranda is unacceptable in science because it lacks specificity. It is important for scientific theories to be clear and specific in order to be testable and verifiable. Miranda's theory about people being able to "see the future" is not well-defined, leaving room for ambiguity and difficulty in conducting empirical tests. Additionally, her revised explanation still lacks specificity as it does not clearly define how these people are unable to report what they know about the future.