Posted on 02/22/2016 10:38:03 AM PST by EveningStar
Whatever. You’re making me repeat myself.
But you have so far said nothing which makes sense.
So feel free to keep trying, I'll let you know if you ever succeed, FRiend.
Of course it can, especially if something opposite is found instead.
csivils: "If it was proven false, the answer would be to blame the current fossil tree data, not the theory."
Of course, a single outlier will not discredit a well-confirmed theory, especially if there are perfectly reasonable explanations for it -- i.e., a rock-slide creating supposed "Cretaceous rabbits".
What would certainly create great scientific interest are confirmed outliers, especially enough of them to establish some recognizable pattern.
Those would be examined very carefully indeed, in a serious effort to determine what was really going on.
But so far, at least, no such have ever been found.
csivils: "Even the example of the bone near the jaw could go either way.
The bone being there is proof, but if the bone was missing it would be proclaimed as an example of a useless body part being evolved away."
Is this what you refer to?
Do you not comprehend that this is talking about a jawbone joint predicted to be found in transitional fossils, which later was found.
And your problem with this is what, exactly?
csivils: "So I ask again for something falseafiable and what you would consider to to be acceptable proof to falsify.
Your example link only had predictions, not examples of what could be falsified or what would be acceptable."
Of course predictions can be falsified, your claims here notwithstanding.
As for what could falsify evolution theory, the answer is virtually any confirmed proof to the contrary, especially if it were more than the occasional outlier.
But much of evolution theory cannot now be falsified because it is already observed & confirmed fact.
This includes everything Creationists call "micro-evolution", meaning: 1) descent with modifications and 2) natural selection.
Barring some error in observation, facts cannot be "un-facted" -- facts are stubborn things, as they say.
But what certainly can be falsified, and indeed is daily falsified are old ideas about geological Deep Time events.
To cite a relatively recent example: the concept of plate-tectonics, as it became more fully confirmed, falsified whole library shelves full of old geology books.
They had to be scrapped or rewritten.
To cite another example: recent DNA analysis has falsified yet more library shelves full of books about biological classifications, and that process is not yet complete.
So, falsification of old ideas is an every-day occurrence in science.
Facts, of course, are much less frequently "falsified".
You can’t or won’t understand. You’re stuck in a very primitive state of understanding of evolution that is textbook gradeschool.
I have no inner need to make you drink the water. “Whatever” means I’ve written you off. There are people who will never grasp a concept, and this is obviously a concept you’ll never get.
You can't or won't explain anything coherently.
SampleMan: "You’re stuck in a very primitive state of understanding of evolution that is textbook gradeschool."
You’re stuck in a very primitive state of mis-understanding of evolution that is textbook gradeschool.
SampleMan: "There are people who will never grasp a concept, and this is obviously a concept you’ll never get."
There are people who will never grasp explain a concept, and this is obviously a concept you’ll never get explain.
Whatever.
Whatever.
Whatever.
Thanks, I can't imagine a more perfectly concise summary of your dozen or so postings here.
Whatever
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.