Question 5: Testability

Simon · Post by **Simon** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:26 pm

What evidence would convince you that evolution is false? If no such evidence exists, or indeed could exist, how can evolution be a testable scientific theory?

Lotan · Post by **Lotan** » Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:01 pm

A Devonian rabbit.

Next...

dangerdan · Post by **dangerdan** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:48 am

Simon, I mean no offence, and this is slightly off topic, but I am just curious – Did you think of these questions yourself or did you, say, cut and paste them from an apologetics website?

I don’t have a problem either way, I’m just curious due to the way they are worded.

Corvus · Post by **Corvus** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 12:57 am

dangerdan wrote:Simon, I mean no offence, and this is slightly off topic, but I am just curious – Did you think of these questions yourself or did you, say, cut and paste them from an apologetics website?

I don’t have a problem either way, I’m just curious due to the way they are worded.

What, you mean like Five questions a Darwinist would rather dodge?

Simon, I personally don't see a problem with this, but I think copyright laws dictate you should probably edit your posts to acknowledge your source.

Simon · Post by **Simon** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 1:47 am

Actually, I did cite my source several times. But.. you know.. way to dodge the questions guys.

Corvus · Post by **Corvus** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 2:04 am

Simon wrote:Actually, I did cite my source several times. But.. you know.. way to dodge the questions guys.

Could you point out where you linked to where you took your questions from? I just checked the topics and only saw you mention "Dembski", the author. Nowhere did you state when proposing the questions that they were ripped verbatim from a website.

As for dodging the question; I have no desire to debate evolutionary theories with anyone at all, since there are people far more familiar with it than I.

Simon · Post by **Simon** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 2:39 am

I didn't say I linked anywhere; I said I cited my source. The 5 questions are very well-known and are in about a hundred different places on the Internet. People quote Gould and Dawkins all the time. I can't quote Dembski? Course I can.

2 and 92 · Post by **2 and 92** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 7:20 am

Fossils of modern mammals mixed with dinosaurs.

A mechanism that would prevent speciation at a genetic level.

Evidence that would limit the age of the Earth to less than one million years. (Current age is estimated at 4.6 billion years or so.)

Evidence of all species appearing without any traceable history either in the fossil record or genetically.

And on and on. There are a million ways to falsify the current theory of evolution. If you are so avid about it being false why don’t you take a few college courses and become a scientist and disprove it? You would become famous and earn a Nobel Prize or two.

bernee51 · Post by **bernee51** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 7:52 am

Simon wrote: If no such evidence exists, or indeed could exist, how can evolution be a testable scientific theory?

Hung on your own petard.

argumentum ad ignorantiam

8)

Simon · Post by **Simon** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 8:07 am

No, you didn't read and understand the question. It is this - how can it be testable. It's rhetorical. Of course, if there is no evidence, it cannot be testable. This is not the same thing as saying that it is false; if it were, then it could be stated as an argument from ignorance. However, it is not the same thing. Pay attention.

Debating Christianity and Religion

Question 5: Testability

Question 5: Testability

Re: Question 5: Testability