No, because you don't know if there was some mistake or something which means that the finding you got at that point in space and time will never be repeated or something like that. Just like how you occasionally get these big physics experiments which get some statistically significant result that for some reason dsiappears and what they thought they found didn't really turn out to be anything. This applies just as well to falsifying as verifying.

I think these arguments apply just as well for falsification. You can't be sure that a theory that has been falsified will stay falsified in the future and won't be re-validated.

>Humans integrate information between themselves through conversation and collaboration. Is there experience happening as a result? Where? That doesn't make any sense to me...

imo it doesn't make any more or less sense than the same idea for neurons, ions, membrane potentials, neurotransmitters, synaptic clefts etc.

no thanks, the idea of freedom is used to justify all sorts of suffering just as much. i dont get why people want to reduce morality to some oversimplified handful of principles. i dont think they ever fully capture people's ideas of morality