Replies

Sure, it can be falsified, BY evolutionists only, on their terms only. Imagine a theory that predicts that there must have been slow changes over time that produced all the millions of species extant, and extinct. Such a theory...from Darwin to present day devotees, predicts that these changes should be observed in the fossil record.

But what does the ACTUAL evidence show? Gaps, and gaps, and gaps. Species appear suddenly, then they go on for millions of years, until this present day, or they went extinct. Evolutionist can find only a few measly fossils (when there ought to be millions...more in fact than all successful species, over all time) that they claim as "transitional," and even that can be argued as labeling only...they have no way of knowing except by similarity of morphology.

And present day experts would have a hard time of identifying the difference between the mammalian wolf, versus the marsupial wolf, by their bones alone.

Not to mention the pre Cambrian explosion of almost all body parts...before that just some algae, a few single-celled animals. Then suddenly an explosion of all types of life. The actual fossil evidence argues persuasively for special creation NOT for slow evolutionary changes.

So instead of falsifying this amazing Gumby theory, like the observation of quantum radiation from black body radiation, which falsified classical physics, what happens?

Gould et. al., propose "Hey there are gaps in the fossil record...well, because there are gaps!" And not to falsify their precious pet theory, they invent punctuated equilibrium to explain the gaps!

Only evolutionary theory presents this circular logic, and that over and over, no matter the evidence that is AGAINST this theory, and there as an abundance, from molecular biology, to information theory, to the fossil record, to the actual study of genetic mutations, to the close scrutinity of the wild claims of (creating LIFE in the lab etc) of evolutionists.

I will not even mention the phony computer simulations by Denton, et al. All debunked by better minds such as Dembski and others. And many of those that do not accept ToE are NOT creationists as me, but world class (but honest) scientists.

And all this defense of the indefensible from probably the most smug arrogant lot that have ever been educated beyond their actual intelligence.

Many of us do not have to be molecular biologists to sense something hysterical, and all-encompassing, about this theory. No matter the data, evolutionary theory will NOT be discarded by its proponents, or even allow competing theories...to such minds evolution IS, they will just modify the theory to accept any data. Sort of, "I will MAKE, or CHOOSE the data that fits MY theory. That is NOT science!

Only evolutionary theory presents this circular logic, and that over and over, no matter the evidence that is AGAINST this theory, and there as an abundance, from molecular biology, to information theory, to the fossil record, to the actual study of genetic mutations, to the close scrutinity of the wild claims of (creating LIFE in the lab etc) of evolutionists.

I wondered when you were going to wheel out information theory, as you have managed to wheel out every other tired canard of the creationists.

The problem with your repeated statement that "there is abundant evidence against the theory" is that the only people who even pretend to be scientists who accept a shred of your "abundant evidence" are religious fundamentalists like you, and even they wildly disagree with each other about the significance of their counter-arguments according to their particular sect and hence their version of scriptural pre-interpretation of evidence.