Though I didn't find this confusing in context, it actually means both.

(cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability)

In philosophy of science, when discussing what makes a good hypothesis, it is used as disprove.

As in: the existence of the Spaghetti Monster cannot be falsified, and thus to believe in it is an act of faith.

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.htm...

It doesn't mean "to disprove" as much as it means "to posit a condition under which the statement would be disproved". In other words, a falsifiable claim is one that can be empirically tested, not one that's necessarily already been proven false.

To be disprovable is to be "falsifiable". To disprove, then, is to "falsify".

Regardless, "fabricates" would be a lot clearer.

I agree. I had sort of a brain fart when I was coming up with a title, and couldn't think of anything that hit the mark short of "BranchOut puts quote from Wall Street Journal that Never Was." Too late to change the URL now, but the title itself is changed.