Is the TOE falsifiable and if it was, would it advance Biblical Creationism

In the thread "Is there really such a thing as a beneficial mutation?" Faith claims: The message where Faith makes that assertion.Is that a valid assertion?I believe that there are many things that might falsify the TOE, although since it is so well supported by so many different brances of science and so much evidence I honestly cannot imagine many things short of the repeated observation of "Special Creation", a lamb giving birth to a bird or a platapus giving birth to cow that would qualify.Some potential things though that might cause a major reexamination of the TOE might be:If we found a whole bunch of anomalous fossils, for example started to regularly find primate fossils in an earlier layer, say Cambrian, and not just the primate fossils but flowering plants and grasses in the Cambrian layers all over the world, that would definitely call things into question. But would that advance the position of classic YEC Biblical Creationism? IMHO, no, not really. The weight of evidence from all other sources still falsifies the idea of a Young Earth or special creation.If on the other hand, we found a genetic indicator that was present in every living species that pointed to a population bottleneck that happened at the same time for every species, along with a single geological flood layer that could be identified world-wide that could also be dated to the same time as the genetic indicator and also a testable model to explain the distribution of unique species of plants and animals to places such as Australia and Micronesia and also a model that explained the hyper-macro-super-colossal evolution that would explain all the species seen on earth and also if all of those things pointed to a period in time about 4000-5000 years ago and were supported by multiple repeated observations and by several different branches of study, then it might be reasonable to reexamine classic Biblical Creationism as it relates to the flood. However, YEC positions would still be falsified based on all of the other weights of evidence and it would NOT support any theological implications. The flood might be in but it would add no weight to the GODDIDIT position.The important points to discuss though are "Should the TOE be falsified, would that lend any credence or support to ideas such as Biblical Creationism?"; and "What would falsify the TOE?"Edited by jar, : revise topic title and minor editEdited by jar, : expand examples

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Title edited

title edited, open to suggestions on the content

Okay, revised yet again. Take another look and as always, open to any suggestions for improvement.

Well if they could explain those things it really wouldn't help their position.The only way that I could see even positive evidence that there was a world wide flood that could be correlated to a genetic indicator that appeared in EVERY living species and where both pointed to the same time period AND they also came up with the testable models to explain the hyper-macro-super-evolution of species afterwards as well as models that explain the specieces distribution we see today, but then could also demonstrate that such a flood was totally impossible would it support the Biblical Creationist position.If they can explain where the water came from or how the flood happened without killing off all life on the earth, then it doesn't support their position. If it's possible then it is just another blip on the historic scale like the Chicxulub impact.Edited by jar, : change meteor to impact

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Actually we have already pointed to several things that would falsify the TOE so I wonder how you can suuport that assertion.From Message 1

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Very good Faith. Perhaps you are beginning to understand just how bankrupt the Biblical Creationist and YEC position are.Before Biblical Creationism or Young Earth could every be taken seriously, or even half seriously, they need to provide models that better explain the observed universe than the current models.If we began finding not just one example of a primate and dinosuar but rather a relatively uniform mixture of more recent critters mixed in with earlier critters, we would have to step back and look at the current TOE and it would have to be revised to explain the evidence seen.But that would not advance Biblical Creationism or a Young Earth. To do that you must first put forward better models and your models must explain the observed universe more successfully than the existing and competing ones.If you believe in either the YEC position of Biblical Creationism you must put forth scientific models that explain what is seen.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Of course I did no such thing. For reference, folk can read Message 26 to see what I actually said.The TOE can be falsified and you have been given examples of what might do that. In fact, it is highly likely and has already happened that the TOE has been shown to be wrong, and has been revised to explain the new observations. That is the way knowledge as opposed to fantasy works.The point is that revising current theories do not add weight or support to either ID, YEC or Biblical Creationist positions. So far none of them explain what is seen.If you hold out any hope of ID or YEC or Biblical Creationism ever being taken seriously, you will have to place models on the table that explain in very great detail ALL of the observations better than the current models.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Correct Faith. It would provide NO additional support for either the ID or YEC or the Biblical Creationist position. Until they can come up with their own models that explain ALL of the evidence better than any existing theories or any revisions of existing theories, they do not stand a chance of being taken seriously.Until you put models on the table that better explain the data YEC and ID and Biblical Creationism are simply bankrupt and worthless.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No that is NOT what was demonstrated. In the example it was GIVEN that the current TOE would NOT allow that. A new model would be needed to explain the evidence if found.However, if that evidence was found, it would add no weight or support to Biblical Creationism.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Of course it would be challenged. If widespread evidence of current critters was found mixed in say the Cambrian layers then it would absolutely challenge the TOE. A completely new model would be needed to explain that. Well, right now Biblical Creationism is just some fantasy. It really doesn't challenge anything. Until it presents models that explain the observed reality better than any existing models, it is a non-starter.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Have you ever read either the Qur'an or Grimm's Fairytales? The Qur'an certainly makes claims about the pastm describes Adam and Eve, the Garden, the naming of the animals.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You can make that assertion, but it is simply false. The example given would overturn the TOE and a whole new paradigm and model would be needed.The only thing known for sure is that the new model won't be YEC or ID or Biblical Creationism.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion