It's easy for people to believe in it, and it makes a good story. To rigorously disprove it, we'd have to pick some other object, not necessarily archaeological, say my car. How many people have come into contact with my car since its "discovery" (creation) 18 years ago? How many of those people have died? Make it a percent, or a rate. Now do the same with some other random object. And another, and another. What's typical? What's statistically acceptable as random chance? NOW compare it to the "mummy's curse" deaths.
A lot of work, neh? Easier to just believe it. Not quite an unfalsifiable statement, as it's possible to test, but not a good choice of hypothesis to be disproveable.
It is not known how many people have worked on the Oetzi project - and whether the death rate is statistically high. ...
Dr Loy's brother Gareth said the two had never talked about a curse - and that Tom Loy had been in poor health, with a condition that caused his blood to clot.
An inquest into Dr Loy's death was inconclusive, ruling out foul play but unable to determine if he had died of natural causes, an accident, or both, Gareth Loy told The Australian newspaper.
An unnamed colleague of Dr Loy scoffed at the idea of a curse, the newspaper reported: "He didn't believe in the curse. It was just superstition. People die."