The phrase "are not demonstrable" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing claims, theories, or phenomena that cannot be proven or shown to be true through evidence or observation.
Example: "The results of the experiment suggest that certain effects are not demonstrable under the current conditions."
Alternatives: "cannot be proven" or "are not verifiable".
The majority of breast abnormalities are currently biopsied under ultrasound guidance, however certain mammographic microcalcifications and small parenchymal deformities are not demonstrable and thus require stereotactic guidance [1].
Two frequent themes of Aristotle's account of science are (1) that the first principles of sciences are not demonstrable and (2) that there is no single universal science including all other sciences as its parts.
However these are not always supported in experimental assays and are not demonstrable in all E. coli strains isolated from cerebral spinal fluid [ 12, 13, 17].
Thus, while morphologically intact constitutional alveolar septum collagen fibrils are seen, without evidence of alternation of the banding periodicity, morphologically normal septum constitutional elastin fibers are not demonstrable.
Thus, three-dimensional quantitative analysis can evaluate and demonstrate the effectiveness and duration of results objectively, as well as show to patients results that are not demonstrable with standard, two-dimensional photography.
As per WHO guidelines, probable diagnosis is based on the clinician's judgment where acid-fast bacilli are not demonstrable but sufficient clinical suspicion and/or radiological evidence exists to initiate empiric TB therapy [ 14].
Immanuel Kant concluded that the soul was not demonstrable through reason, although the mind inevitably must reach the conclusion that the soul exists because such a conclusion was necessary for the development of ethics and religion.
However, this was not demonstrable for the valgus laxity.
Hence Malebranche himself would have to admit that the third maxim, at least, is not demonstrable.
Hook's claim is that the premise of Stevenson's argument, namely, that all the facts relevant to attitudes in a moral dispute have been discovered, is not demonstrable.
Campbell cannot resist ending on an ad hominem of his own: "If he [Dingle] does not deem it important to observe the distinction between what is and what is not demonstrable experiment, surely he should welcome a movement to amalgamate the Royal with the Aristotelian Society".
