But since that isn't going to happen I recommend that this thread be shut down. And since that isn't going to happen I'll try to ignore it. Have a good day.
I think everyone is mystified by this reaction. You appear to be looking for an excuse to run off in a huff. My opinion is that you pull this act so frequently that probably few pay it any attention.
Oh and by the way, evolution theory is not falsifiable. Fat chance that's going to be acknowledged either.
The falsifiability of evolution is not the topic. It was mentioned solely because you seemed to feel that evolution was somehow distinct from the rest of science, so I enumerated the various qualities of science that evolution satisfies.
But your assertion is a good example of your preferred approach to discussion that many have been disclaiming about. It is just an unsupported assertion barren of any argument or supporting evidence. If you'd like to discuss whether evolution is falsifiable then I suggest you propose a new thread, but be prepared to bring more to the table than mere assertion.
There is no point in addressing anything seriously when I get the kind of nonsense answers to anything I say that I am now dealing with. Good grief what a joke. How can I discuss my view of the so-called beneficial mutations when I get the kind of nonsense Percy has been dishing out about wisdom teeth as a supposed rebuttal? Or Crash's bland insistence that all traits are the result of beneficial mutations when that simply cancels out the creationist view on the basis of definition without evidence. Same with the definition of beneficial mutations in terms of being absorbed into the population. Just a definitional elimination of the opponent's point of view as I previously explained. The deck is stacked. This whole thing is a monstrously ridiculous pathetic exercise in futility.
Please cease your participation in this thread until you're prepared to constructively discuss the issues.
I'd like to request that you address the specifics of the arguments. For example this:
I appreciate the distinction, but the whole thing is hypothetical in any case, this idea that this directionless or nonteleological or nonintentional change -- in dialectic, as it were, with environmental conditions -- has produced what exists.
Is an assertion with no supporting argument or evidence, and which addresses none of the many specifics that have been provided throughout this thread.
Intuitively, just from what I've learned so far about the different forms of mutations, no way could those changes explain what exists. I hardly see that my intuition is any less scientific than the intuition that says otherwise; both are pure guesses and both rely on hypothetical thinking to justify them.
This, too, is a simple assertion of your opinion, one which you have stated in various forms throughout this thread.
It is well past time for you to stop merely stating your opinion and to proceed on to making the case for it, either by direct rebuttal to the evidence and argument that has been presented to far, or by introducing your own counter-evidence and argument, or any combination of the two.
If you instead choose to only restate your opinion then please stop participating in this thread. Any future posts or replies you make in this thread that only state your opinion or that go off topic to complain about other's behavior will result in a suspension. If you have complaints about other members or about moderation, please take them to the appropriate thread.