RationalWiki’s article on Austrian Economics is loaded with strawmen. I’m no expert, but i have enough sense to know when they have no idea what they’re talking about:

“Perhaps one reason they are so uncomfortable with empiricism is that Austrian economists are more interested in defending the political ideology of libertarianism than they are in advancing economic understanding, and rigorous testing can sometimes undermine deeply held political beliefs.”

Now, what’s the case with falsification? Doesn’t Human Action make the case for falsification, attacking verification; and wasn’t Hazlitt’s Failure of the New Economics a book about falsifying Keynes? So why the argument that AEs don’t believe in falsification? That’s a sincere question I’m asking (agitated by insincere blowhards).

For example, if praxeological analysis says that unemployment benefits prolong the period people remain unemployed, then an Austrian economist might look to empirical studies that support the praxeological model as further evidence that the praxeology is correct. 

However, an Austrian would never look at unemployment statistics and then try to draw conclusions from an econometric model.  That would be the exact inverse of what an Austrian would do.