Opponents of Evolution Adopting a New Strategy

I would go even further. Any alternative explanation should also be able to be falsified or verified by the prediction of new physical eveidence that is a logical and exclusive consequence of the explanation in question.Wumpini has his hands full at the moment but if things do progress to alternative explanations of the known evidence I think that the validity of the explanation in terms of the above will be the key differentiator between the scientific explanation and any other proposed.

Firstly I think you should stick to the areas that evolutionary theory actually claims to have the best scientific explanation for.Abiogenesis is recognised as an area of much research and little conclusion. Is this a weakness? Not in scientific terms where ignorance is infintely preferable to unsubstantiated falsehood (if any text books suggest abiogenesis is proven fact then I would agree that they should revoke this assertion).In the remainder of this thread stick to areas of established evolutionary theory and explain why they are, or on the basis of evidence may be, wrong.It is my view that, like any scientific theory, there are weaknesses in the detail of evolutionary theory. That is why research into these subjects exists!!However unlike most scientific theories any criticism of any aspect of evolutionary theory is pounced upon as a plus for the inherently undemonstrable and non-scientific conclusions of creationism. Conclusions that have no physical validity. Conclusions that explain everything and nothing. Conclusions that make no predictions and which are inherently scientifically untestable. Conclusions that exist as a result of philosophical bias alone.Because of this the usual high regard for dissent that is encouraged in science is much more strongly resisted in the field of evolutionary biology.In my limited, non-expert and very probably wrong, view the creationist position is potentially holding back advancement in the field of evolutionary biology by suppressing constructive skepticism and healthy debate.All theories have weaknesses. The weakness of the creationist argument is however the cause of possible and potential weaknesses in evolutionary theory not being explored to the extent that they would be in less contentious areas of science.

Of course you can in theory but in practise there is little doubt that the creationist lobby will push for the opposite at the slightest opportunity to do so. I have to disagree. Objective wholly empirical evidence based conclusions are not what the creation and ID people are aiming for. They have a very definite alternative agenda. Your conclusion seems a little naive regarding this point. Nothing so specific. I just meant that by leaping on every unanswered question as a reason to inject mysticism into the science classroom they make scientists defensive and thus effectively stifle debate even where debate might be warranted or conducive to progress. This is my view. I am not sure how widely shared it is by those in the front line of the debate however. I agree. How are we to inspire the next generation of scientists if not by exposing them to the great and interesting questions that remain to be answered? Is anyone claiming that we should tell students that we have a fully devloped and tested theory of abiogenesis? I shall have to go back and read previous posts in more detail. But lets also tell students what we do actually know about this area and the reasoning we have for ongoing research. Yes you should respond. I personally would separate origins of life from development of life as a subject area. On the basis that we have a well formed and tested theory for one but not the other if nothing else. However who am I to dictae what should and should not be discussed if you want to cover all areas and others are willing to do so.I think your general approach is much more reasoned than many many creationists. I do however also think your arguments will ultimately be exposed as wrong. Evolution (abiogenesis apart ) is about as solid a scientific theory as you could hope to find. Others better qualified than I seem keen to demonstrate this so lets see what happens.