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

sure it would, something found that it says wouldn't be there would challenge it.
creationism doesn't challege ToE as a whole, it isn't even in the same room with the ToE, you can't challenge something you can't understand, all you can do is make a strawman to fight and claim you win.as per the topic: the fact that if the ToE was falsafied, creationism would still remain irrelevent to science, creationism can't even come up with one unified answer to anything.
ID is built on the assuption that Evolution is defaulted to the realm of the impossible from the start, even the leaders of the ID movement say soas for YEC itself, if you can't even be bothered to read how floods work and how sediment is layed down and how limestone is formed, anyone who knows anything about these things will take the YEC belief as nothing more than hokumEdited by ReverendDG, : more OT stuffEdited by ReverendDG, : No reason given.Edited by ReverendDG, : No reason given.

i can answer that for you, she believes the bible, she doesn't believe the aenid. thats pretty much itread back on any posts were anyone points out that the stories in the bible are pretty much just like any other mythology, every creationist anyone points this out to ignores it, purely on the fact that they believe the bibleEdited by ReverendDG, : No reason given.

well it would be a huge problem for ToE if humans appeared before thier ancesters, can't have the decendent before the parent can you?as for dinosaurs existing long after 65 mya, it might be possible but not likely considering the enviriment has changed so much, both plant eaters and meat eaters would die off without the proper food they need, i doubt a large population would survive, since one of the ways they died off was mammals eatting the eggs and young, it would be hard for them to adapt to the tempeture and so forth its not though its based on many things if you go read about it, from ice cores to argon-dating etc, handwaving away science doesn't make it useless yes and you still need to learn about floods, you just do not understand floods do not work this way, there would be no layers if it was a flood, everything would be jumbled up not found in layers that show calm waters and land, with all kinds of signs of life that show no huge floods - i mean layers show termite nests! if it was a worldwide flood it wouldn't show them it would erase them
theres worm holes in the ground theres foot prints in more than one layer
floods do not do this it is impossible
if you have real evidence show the possiblity i'd love to see it, other wise all you have is worse speculation than anything you claim the evolutionary scientists have no i think he would put YEC on it's ear for fooling people into thinking that YEC is possible via the physical laws he created, i doubt he likes all this legistic nonsense YECs confess to

speaking as bloke from kansas (i wanted to use the word )
i pity the rest of my state and continue to vote for any laws repealing anything having to do with teaching creationism or ID
though i do love the FSM and i laugh at the morons that think eather ID or creationism of any form is good for my state

evidence for this? its not remotely a philosophy in the sense you are using it, we use philosophy to frame science, but ToE is a theory not a philosophy, i'm not sure do you know what philosophies are? go read a few books on ToE, the theory can't do what you are claiming, if we are descended from an ape-like creature going down to the first mammals as the thoery saidwe are, there is no way the thoery can adjust to the fossil of a man being in strata before the many anscesters existed.
ok as an example if we found fossils of humans in strata with ONLY spineless animals and nothing higher the theory would be false since it says we wouldn't find an animal with a spine before spines deveopled guess what? thats not how it works, we find maybe the tail-end of speciation and can re-classify it, but we will never see natural speciation in real-time, speciation can be seen in labs but that is not natural speciation - this has no limits, what could the limit be?if there was it would falsify the theory evidence of this? you have no basis for this claim, the court ruled that ID was not science and should not be taught in schools. it will never be illegal to bring up problems you have with ToE, but don't expect people to play nice if your problems with it are not problems or are strawman of the theory, since this is your misunderstanding the theory and not the theory itself - Your "fact" is just wrongby the way ID is a philosophy since you can't ever falsify it, being that the basis comes down to GOD and god can do anything, how do you falsify that?

evidence that PE doesn't work please, this is nothing more than a claim, i've read there is evidence of PE i asked you what the limit would be, we see not evidence there would be any as far as what can be possible, the only thing is the evirirment and part of the ToE accounts for this.
what do you mean "pushed enough?" they die because they don't fit the niche anymore or don't adapt enough to produce another generation to survive the enviriment.
any evidence there are limits and they have shown this in the lab? evidence please, i've read no such thing, the judge found that a theory that bases its foundation on the failure of another theory is not useful or science. thoerys stand on thier own, ID can only work if it answers all the questions not just poking holes in evolution yes and what do 99% of the IDists think the designer is? God. DI even says that they are out to wedge religion into schools, they don't even hide this.
as for your mis-representation, i said nothing about design automaticly shows god, i said it comes down to god since ID considers complexity of life shows intelligence, any other answer but god being the designer, allows people to ask who designed the designer, its a few steps to just admiting you believe god designed life.which is why the judge ruled that ID is not science and will not be taught in dover because, ID tries to pretend it is science when its religion just like creationism, not talking about the designer, doesn't help since if it was a true scientific theory it would be about the designer

nope, i found a book called 'A kansian guide to evolution' it was about 20 pages, i think thats about all IDiests in kansas can read before thier heads explode

no creationism would never be effected, at least not as far as it being taken seriously as science, since you need to prepose so many things that have no evidence and are based on nothing but wishing and deny so much agenst it to make it true