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

obvous Child: Please, no one is laughing at the US. America is highly regarded in Taiwan. Democracy took root here under an umbrella of American protection. And America has the iPod and the NBA and Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt. How cool is that?And you are right about the universities. American higher education is respected by everyone, it seems, except American fundamentalists.
Every country has its historical problems, that's all. People know this.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

You are complimented on your intelligence frequently here.Why on earth would you think, after having been here for years that this would need to be rationalized in any way at all?It would be a wonderful surprise but such a discovery would not(obviously to anyone who understands just a modest amount) in anyway mean a darn thing to our understanding of the ToE.Seeing a human in the jurassic would be a big fundamental problem seeing a dinosaur today would not be a fundamental problem at all. Harder to explain than the Coelacanth and more surprising but having no more theoretical problem than it did.I'm afraid Faith that you are, indeed, wasting your time.

Funny backhanded way to do it but you are supporting what I've been saying. This is exactly what I meant by "rationalizing it away." That is, it wouldn't make any difference at all to the ToE, it would merely require some minor adjustments in a small piece of the theory. Now, jar says otherwise, so you might want to take it up with him.However, I was no doubt being too cynical in saying humans in the Jurassic wouldn't be much of a problem to rationalize away either. Maybe that would in fact be a real problem for the ToE. MAYBE. I do rather think all it would do is cause a scramble to compress the modern periods in the time scale since the Jurassic, or something along those lines (see, I can think like an evo too). The whole time table being purely imaginative and hypothetical, it's no problem to re-organize it as needed to accommodate this sort of thing.But I do think finding a human in the Carboniferous might do it. The problem with that is the odds: the lower strata represent marine life caught in the Flood as opposed to land life. I guess some humans COULD have been out on the water at the time of the flood, drowned at sea and been sucked into a lower layer along with the more primitive marine life. Could have happened I guess, but finding the few that happened to on the entire planet is a mathematically unpromising prospect.Nevertheless God is sovereign over all these things and maybe He'll allow us eventually to discover the evidence that will set the ToE on its ear.{EDIT: Sorry, got this wrong. The Carboniferous isn't a marine layer, it's too high, has land plants in it -- but not high enough for humans. Wouldn't expect to find humans there. So find me a lower layer for an example.Edited by Faith, : Provide reason for edit Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It would require no adjustments to the theory at all. If you think it would perhaps you could point them out. I supposed Jar may have, IMO, gotten it wrong but I'll reserve judgement until you point out the place where he did. I've forgotten: what it you or randman that thinks there should be a lot more fossils found?Edited by NosyNed, : spellin

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

Oh I don't think it requires any adjustments to the THEORY itself, just in a side tangent from the theory, only in the side issue that says dinosaurs and humans didn't co-exist. Oh, it would also put a crimp in the idea that dinosaurs were wiped out in that supposed extinction event with all the meteoric stuff. But I agree, none of that is the theory itself, it's just associated with the theory in so many minds that people have actually disputed that the theory would be untouched by this, jar for one as I said, so talk to him as I said. Probably Randman but it sounds reasonable to me. I mean there's a lot of earth out there that hasn't been dug into isn't there?But my point was that mathematically, given WHAT I SAID, it would be highly unlikely to find human fossils in the LOWER STRATA, the strata at the MARINE LEVEL. The chances improve in the upper strata, the land strata, but as I said, human ingenuity in escaping probably made them less vulnerable to deep burial than to being washed away or perhaps shallow burial in which they'd just have rotted away.As for jar's taking the finding of humans and dinosaurs together as a serious threat to the ToE see his Message 72Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Archer Opterix, not to sure about that. Kansas's recent crusade aganist evolution and science in general brought mockery from many different nations and cultures. Kansas became the laughing stock of the world for openly supporting literal creation. While that is one state, more then a few would like to follow it.

Faith: Beware the fallacy (one of them) that sank the ID advocates in the Dover ruling. Their fallacy lay in assuming that anytime the rival theory 'lost,' theirs gained ground.Valid theories require evidence. Casting doubts on one theory does not mean another wins by default.It is one task to set the ToE on its ear. It is another to establish a scientifically valid model in its place.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

The problem is that evolutionary theory has evolved to become more than a theory. It's a philosophy. And philosophies can't be falsified.For if humans were found in lower strata, then evolutionary theory would adjust to say that the pre-cursors to humans are there, but didn't fossilize or haven't been found yet.OR if speciation was found to have solid limits, then the theory would simply say that we've not given it enough time, that the fossil record indicates otherwise.So, while true scientific theories are falsifiable, philosophies are not. A great example of this, is the fact that it's now illegal to bring up said difficulties of evolutionary theory in the high school science classroom in Dover.Science has nothing to fear from the discussion of difficulties, but philosophies do. Edited by Hughes, : spelling...

Not sure why you feel it necessary to answer me thus. I merely said maybe God will be pleased to allow us to find whatever evidence is needed to overthrow the ToE -- whatever evidence that might take, to overthrow it, to establish a creationist model, all of the above. Pretty general statement.Maybe He won't. Maybe He doesn't want this problem solved. That's crossed my mind many times. He wants trust in Him by faith. He may withhold knowledge in this particular theologically sensitive area for that purpose. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

INteresting angle on it to call it a philosophy. Yes, the capacity for adjustment and rationalization is remarkable. But I'm not sure about that lower strata rationalization. A fully formed human fossil in the very bottom layers would have to catch them up short I would think. You are certainly right about the time rationalization though. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Heh, the ultimate get-out clause.No evidence - it must all be part of God's plan!

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

Total misrepresentation. Teaching diffciluties in evolutionary theory is one thing (there are still many more things to learn, as any biologist will tell you), teaching outright lies and mischaracterisations regarding the ToE by poorly qualified YEC or ID "scientists" is quite another.Would you trust your health to a snake-oil salesman or to a qualified doctor?

You really didn't understand what I just wrote up there, did you? To completely reject ToE you need to provide a scientific explanation that better explains the diversity of life we have today. Therefore, I can hardly give an example, since I would then have falsified ToE (and be on my way to Stockholm to collect a very prestigious prize). Again: you can reject a theory by supplying a new scientific one that better explains current observations.