Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?

No, and no. I am giving you the definitions, criteria, and experiments for why evolution is not guided. It isn't guided or directed. Nowhere in any of my posts did I say evolution is guided or directed.

You don't even know what a phylogeny is. How can you hope to respond to the challenge when you don't even understand what a phylogeny is?

You don't even know what the theory of evolution is, so how could you falsify it? You don't even understand genetics or biology.All you have is your extremely uninformed and unscientific reasons for why you refuse to accept a theory that you don't even understand.

The problem is not just MrID's ignorance of evolution et alia and how they work, but that he has associated grossly false ideas with those words. That makes it virtually impossible to ever explain the truth to him.Since nothing MrID has ever said has ever made any sense, I'll use fellow creationist candle2's misrepresentation of evolution as a simpler example.candle2 "defines" what evolution is and how it works with the standard creationist lie that evolution effectively requires dogs to give birth to kittens. To quote him directly from his Message 1328: candle2 has also demanded that we "prove" evolution and we have responded by explaining to him in detail what evolution is and how it works. But of course he rejects all our explanations, because in order for us to "prove" evolution to his satisfaction we must prove that dogs can give birth to kittens. That is after all what evolution is, not in reality but rather in his mind. And of course we cannot possibly supply such "proof", because that is not how anything works, plus if such an event were to occur (eg, dogs giving birth to kittens) then that would not only disprove evolution but also virtually everything we know about biology.Namely, candle2's own gross misunderstanding of evolution prevents him from learning what evolution really is.In another example on YouTube, Erika (AKA "Gutsick Gibbon") posted a conversation with a young earth creationist. It all went very cordially with the YEC (an honest one for a welcome change) politely and intently listening to Erika's explanations about fossils. In answer to the YEC's question about how fossils are dated, Erika explained that radiometric dating cannot be applied directly to a fossil (since that would require the fossil to have been completely melted, which would destroy the fossil), but rather fossils are dated by the age of the strata they are found in (cue in explanations of how that is done).Although the YEC was listening intently and trying to understand the explanation, I could see the look of confusion on her face and could guess the question in her mind: "But that doesn't explain how you date a fossil directly." All her creationism training had taught her that we must be able to date fossils directly, so she expected an explanation of how to date a fossil directly. That expectation conflicted directly with the reality that Erika was trying to explain to her, that that is not how it works. Her false expectations were preventing her from learning.Similarly, candle2's false expectations of what "proof of evolution" would have to answer prevent him from learning what it really is and how it really works -- same as with all creationists.In the same manner, MrID's false ideas and expectations of what evolution is lead him to write "a FALSIFICATION ARTICLE for Evolution Theory" which has nothing whatsoever to do with evolution and ends up being complete and utter rubbish. And those same false ideas and expectations also prevent him from understanding the truth that we're trying to tell him, including what you're trying to explain to him about his idiotic questions about evolution being "guided".Until he can start to learn what evolution really is and how it works, it will be impossible for us to inform him of the truth. Nothing we ever say to him will make any sense to him, because it does not agree with his false ideas and expectations. He will forever be trapped in an impenetrable bubble of abject ignorance and self-delusion.

The other problem is MrID is only interested in protecting an ideology, not in discovering the truth. We might as well go to a flat Earth website to learn about orbital mechanics.All MrID sees is ideology. That's it. MrID could care less about what science is or how it works. He just wants certain words to be used to describe certain things, facts be damned. Science is just something that must be brushed aside in the name of ideological purity. They know so little about the theory they rail against that they actually demand evidence that disproves the theory in order to accept it. Yet another creationist who doesn't understand what a phylogeny is.

Do you think classical mechanics is wrong because natural gravity guides planets in their orbit around the Sun?Do you think there needs to be an intelligence to guide water so it always goes downhill?Do you think there needs to be an intelligence to guide the precipitation of water vapor into water droplets for cloud formation?

If you are impressed with your interaction with the Grand Poobah himself (Aron Ra) then show us this link. Personally, I am not impressed with Aron Ra, but would be curious to see the link myself.

And he has disappeared as I suspected he would.I very much doubt that there is anything to MrID's claim. Rather, I think that his boast is a lie. He tried to bluff us and we called his bluff, so he folded.The only question would be the exact nature of his lie. Did he lie about AronRa having replied to his comments on a YouTube video? Did he even lie about having posted comments?Assuming the existence of said comments and reply from AronRa, then most certainly MrID is lying about the nature of that reply. Or at least sought to grossly misconstrue it. Remember, MrID is claiming that AronRa is terrified of responding to him, whereas in reality MrID is just plain so full of bullshit that AronRa doesn't have the time to waste on him nor his army of fellow trolls.Here is a recent video posted by AronRa (10 hours ago), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYngbZ28LL4: In it, he explains about how trolls try to waste his time with long diatribes of complete nonsense (AKA "creationism") and then he addresses the "questions" of one of them (not MrID, but rather a standard issue creationist idiot). Now let us examine MrID's bluff further.He obviously does not want us to read for ourselves his purported comment exchange with AronRa, which is why he will never provide a link to the video in question. After all, in my decades-long experience with creationists the first step in responding to one of their claims is also usually the last step in refuting that claim: Looking up the source for their claim reveals that that source does not say what they claim it does.Hence, once we read that comment exchange for ourselves we will see that it's entirely different than MrID's misrepresentation of it. Therefore, MrID has a vest interest in preventing us from ever reading it ourselves, which requires making it as difficult as possible, even impossible, to ever find that exchange.This is similar to a common creationist dodge of refusing to provide the evidence that they constantly claim to have and shifting that responsibility onto us: "If you really want to see my evidence, then go find it yourself!" Seriously, they'll do that! An example is Dr. Duane Gish's "bullfrog protein" claim, which he made up on the spot on national TV ("Creation vs Evolution: Battle in the
Classroom", KPBS-TV, aired 7 July 1982) to "counter" Dr. Doolittle's presentation of human-chimp protein comparisons:

quote:

---

Doolittle:

Ever since the time of Darwin the chimpanzee has been regarded as man's nearest living relative. Naturally it was then of interest to biochemists to see what chimpanzee proteins would look like. Now the first protein to be looked at in a chimpanzee, and compared with a human, was the hemoglobin molecule -- hemoglobin one of the blood proteins -- and in fact, there were no differences found in the chimpanzee molecule when 141 amino acids were looked at in the hemoglobin alpha chain. In contrast, if you looked at a rhesus monkey, there were four differences; or if you looked at a rabbit, you found the differences got up into the 20s. If you got up to a chicken you'd find 59 differences; and if you looked at a fish you'd find there were more than a hundred differences. Now this is exactly what you expect from the point of view of evolution.

​

Narrator: "Three more proteins were analyzed."

​

Doolittle:

Once again, no differences compared -- chimpanzee compared with human. It was astonishing. In fact a rumor began to sweep around biochemists, that maybe all the differences between chimpanzee and human were really going to turn out to be cultural. Well, in fact, one more protein was quickly looked at - -- this was a large one -- 259 amino acids -- and a difference was found. Whew!

​

. . .

​

Gish:

If we look at certain proteins, yes man then, it can be assumed that man is more closely related to a chimpanzee than other things. But, on the other hand, if you look at certain proteins, you will find that man is more closely related to a bullfrog than he is to a chimpanzee. If you focus your attention on other proteins, you'll find that man is more closely related to a chicken than he is to a chimpanzee.

​

Doolittle:

Oh bullfrog! I've heard that gibberish before, I have to tell you."

​

(Doolittle then indicated a book full of amino acid sequences from thousands of proteins taken from many hundreds of species and offered Gish all his worldly belongings, a '63 VW and half a house, if Gish could find just one protein in chickens or bullfrogs that is more closely related to human proteins than chimpanzee)

---

Others, including science writer Robert Schadewald, tried to follow up with Gish about his "bullfrog protein". At one point he let it slip that his claim was based on a joke he had overheard ("such a protein had been found, but the results could not be duplicated because the protein was from an enchanted prince"), but even after that slip Gish kept insisting that the protein did indeed exist and that he had evidence of it that he would provide ... which he never did. Finally, he refused altogether and when asked who is responsible for documenting those proteins, Gish said that it was up to Schadewald and Curtis (i.e. "You want to know the sources for my claims? YOU go look it up!").In this case, MrID wants to send us off on a wild goose chase which would require us to search through the comments section of every single AronRa video. Not only does each one of those comments sections extend on for many pages (that just keeps loading as you scroll down, but many an individual comment has its own long replies list which is hidden from the top-level view, thus requiring us to painstakingly drill down through the entire comments tree.And it doesn't help that we don't even know what MrID's user name is on YouTube.He wants to send us off on a wild goose chase where we would waste hours, days, weeks, even months and years trying to find something that most likely doesn't even exist (if common creationist practice is any indication).OTOH, when MrID opens YouTube he can pull down a list of his comments that have been replied to -- that's how it works for me.Therefore, if he wanted us to know what AronRa's reply was, then he could go straight to those comments and copy and paste them here, both his comment and AronRa's reply. Would take him no more than a few minutes. IF he wanted us to know what AronRa's reply was. Which he obviously doesn't want, so he ensures that we will never be able to find it.

Thanks for that thoughtful post. I poked around a bit (not that im in any way interested in what Mr.ID has to say) and found one thing.
Not too impressive.

Did I find your video? Is that you in the previous post?

See vimesey's Message 164.You're a month late.

Which still does not explain MrID's refusal to point us to the video that he was talking about.Of course, the standard explanation is that he's a creationist, so he must use any and all dishonest tricks he can.

Sorry that I could not response quickly since I am writing an article for submission: falsification of Evolution Theory. Sorry for my late reply. I am doing the article. If you knew what is wrong, then, you will also know what is right, thus, alternative explanation would be very easy.

That word salad still does not solve the mystery of why you refuse to provide a link to the video that you claimed exists. The alternative to your incoherent nonsense is called science and evolution. Please learn what those are.

Science is science, all agreed with that.But Evolution is not science.