Replies

LOL, I take it you didn't like the previous answer. I don't know but more than that I don't really care.

It is not a question of dislike. It is an important factor to note. Whether or not the genome is intelligently designed calls into question whether or not the "design" of Monsanto can be detected.

That's because you are a one note Dimensio, stuck in a box of your own making.

I fail to see how understanding the specific defined scope of the theory of evolution has me "stuck in a box".

The relevance is simply this, if you live by falsifiability you die by falsifiability. Abiogenesis can not be science and as such, according to that icon of the Darwinian Judge Jones, it should never enter the realm of science. Yet it does!

This is a misstatement of science. Explanations presented as scientific theories must be falsifiable. If they are not, then they cannot be considered more than hypothesis. I am aware of no one who presents abiogenesis as a scientific theory.

Whether or not the genome is intelligently designed calls into question whether or not the "design" of Monsanto can be detected.

:-} Right. Of course you never asked me how or if design can be detected, you asked me how intelligent design as a mechanism to change allel frequency can be TESTED. I told you how, you obviously didn't like the answer because you went home to the barn and got out the design detection strawman.

But FWIW, Monsanto uses markers.

This is a misstatement of science. Explanations presented as scientific theories must be falsifiable.

Live and learn. So the demarcation between science and non-science below the hierarchial structure of the theory is not falsifiabilty?

Wow!