[andysandmikesmom]

This particular discussion that is going on between the two of you, really has me confused...

Andrew...are you saying, that evolution 'appears' not to be false, because there is fake evidence for it(and an assumption that this will always be the case), and that all the evidence against evolution is ignored(and again, an assumption that this will always be the case)...therefore one must concede that there is some deliberate plot to prevent evolution from ever being shown to be false, hence it cannot be falsifiable because no one will ever allow such evidence to come to light?

Therefore, is what you are saying the following...that evolution should be able to be falsifiable, but it cannot be falsifiable, because the evidence is always being manipulated or hidden in such a way, as to prevent the possibility of falsifiability?

Dont know if you understand what I am trying to say here, but I am doing my best...just trying to understand exactly what you mean here..

[Liberal Classic]

I'm not sure he knows himself. He seems to be saying that evolutionary theory is unfalsifiable (meaning that it can't be tested at all so no evidence against the theory can exist) yet simultaneously there exists evidence against it which is suppressed from public knowledge.

[AndrewC]

Therefore, is what you are saying the following...that evolution should be able to be falsifiable, but it cannot be falsifiable, because the evidence is always being manipulated or hidden in such a way, as to prevent the possibility of falsifiability?

Fairly close. We all "know" that the MSM is all "fair and balanced".

[Elsie]

This particular discussion that is going on between the two of you, really has me confused...

You want to be REALLY confused?? ;^)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1618846/posts?page=769#769