[Jaime2099]

Which is the very reason that creation is not science. In order to be considered as science it would have to be able to be falsified.

If it cannot be ruled out then it must be included, Biology is scientifically incomplete without creation. Creation is a possible origin of all species and, if possible, it must be included in Biology. So you believe it cannot be falsified? If so, then you are a creationist. What I said was it cannot be excluded because there is no scientific evidence that the theory is untrue. I never said it cannot be falsified, if it is untrue, then it should be able to falsified using science. To say creation cannot be falsified is to say it is true, or it is to say that Biology is not a science since it studies the origin of species. And, if it is the study of the origin of species, then it must be able to falsify creation scientifically, or include it as a legitimate theory. You cannot scientifically eliminate creation from Biology because it belongs there, not because it is unscientific.

[Ira_Louvin]

Your quote was ““no one can rule out creation scientifically”

If you cannot rule something out, then it cannot be falsified since the act of ruling it out would be falsification.

As far as creation, while the origins of life are a question of interest to evolutionary biologist and frequently studied in conjunction with researchers from other fields such as geochemistry and organic chemistry, the core of evolutionary theory itself does not rest on a foundation that requires any knowledge about the origins of life on earth. It is primarily concerned with the change and diversification of life after the origins of the earliest living things –

By your response it is painfully obvious that you do not understand science