Huh? Chuck, what are you talking about?
So you want creationists to try to falsify a strawman position?
Huh?
No, I want you to try and falsify the Theory of Evolution.
What strawman are you talking about?
By saying only one little rabbitt will falify our false theory?
No, I think you have hold of the wrong end of the stick. The pre-Cambrian rabbit is an iconic example of a potential piece of evidence that would falsify the ToE. Check it out;
quote:
At one time, "Precambrian rabbits" or "fossil rabbits in the Precambrian" rock samples became popular imagery in debates about the validity of the theory of evolution and the scientific field of evolutionary biology. The images are reported to have been among responses given by the biologist, J.B.S. Haldane, when he was asked what evidence could destroy his confidence in the theory and the field of study. Many of his statements about his scientific research were popularized in his lifetime.
Some accounts use this response to rebut claims that the theory of evolution is not falsifiable by any empirical evidence. This followed an assertion by philosopher, Karl Popper, who had proposed that falsifiability is an essential feature of a scientific theory. Popper also expressed doubts about the scientific status of evolutionary theory, although he later concluded that the field of study was genuinely scientific.
Rabbits are mammals. From the perspective of the philosophy of science, it is doubtful whether the genuine discovery of mammalian fossils in Precambrian rocks would overthrow the theory of evolution instantly, although, if authentic, such a discovery would indicate serious errors in modern understanding about the evolutionary process. Mammals are a class of animals, whose emergence in the geologic timescale is dated to much later than any found in Precambrian strata. Geological records indicate that although the first true mammals appeared in the Triassic period, modern mammalian orders appeared in the Palaeocene and Eocene epochs of the Palaeogene period. Hundreds of millions of years separate this period from the Precambrian.
From
Wiki.
If the TOE is untrue how can something that is already false be falsified?
My dear fellow, I am claiming that the ToE is
true.
You are claiming that the ToE is
false.
If you think the ToE is false, you should be able to point to evidence that falsifies it.
I think that the Toe is true, so I am under no such obligation.
You see how this works?
It's setup to cover anything that would dare come againt it. Like the definition of a "scientific theory"
I think that you are drifting into paranoia here. Trust me Chuck, the philosophy of science was not created to irk creationists. Real scientists have better things to do. Despite the comforting delusions of creationists who like to view themselves as being persecuted by a conspiracy of evil atheistic scientists, most actual scientists couldn't give a toss about creationism. It isn't even on their radar.
Well then what exactly is the scientific method. Do you agree that science follows the scientific method for the TOE?
Defining the scientific method isn't really part of the scope of this thread, but yes, I do think that evolutionary biology follows the scientific method. You disagree? Show me where you think it diverges from the method.
Mutate and Survive
Edited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.