Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?

Thread copied here from the Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

If a constructive discussion doesn't soon begin and aspersions and name calling don't soon end then I will begin taking an active role in the moderation of this thread.I'm not going to be coaching or advising anyone toward constructive participation. Either you're capable of it and willing to do it or you're not, and those who are not will find their ability to participate diminished.

Sensei's daily post limit has been set to 1.

Just a few comments about things that to me aren't in question.If you're writing about the person you're discussing with instead of the topic, you might want to reassess posting itFrom http://www.grammarly.com:

quote:

---

The appeal to authority fallacy is the logical fallacy of saying a claim is true simply because an authority figure made it.

---

The goal here is not to nag others into reading material that convinces them. The goal is to convince others through arguments made in your own words about evidence that's been presented here.And it is a certainty that the information and data gathered during an experiment constitutes evidence.

Since moderators should treat everyone fairly and the same, henceforward anyone discussing other participants instead of the topic will also have their post rate set to 1/day.I hope someone will take the lead at reintroducing the topic. If it helps, one issue that appeared under discussion earlier was universal ancestry. Perhaps someone could present the evidence for universal ancestry, and another person could present the evidence against.Of course I just mean the gist, summary or framework of the evidence, not a reference to a multi-volume tome or the address of the Harvard Library (neither of which would be appropriate).

From the Forum Guidelines:

5. Bare links with no supporting discussion should be avoided. Make the argument in your own words and use links as supporting references.

This was the best effort at reintroducng the topic, but it only alludes to what's been said in the past. I think each side needs to restate the initial premise along with a brief summary of their evidence.

The request that sensei produce evidence supporting his view against common ancestry is reasonable, but he says a couple things that seem to indicate he may have a different understanding of the opposing evidence that he faces. For example, in Message 476 he says: What does he mean by "different sample set of ancestor genes?" Maybe it's significant, maybe not, but it might be worth exploring. And this: I can't be sure exactly what is meant here, but it might indicate there's some information he's unaware of. I don't know what this means either, but it might lie close to the heart of sensei's objections, and if so it should be understood.

Sensei's post limit has been increased to 2 per day.

Sensei's post limit has been removed.