Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution ... Or unkind dismissal?

[Med911]

Re: Apologetic Islamic take on Evolution … Or unkind dismissal?

@psyah

You are neither clealy listening …nor are you trying to understand … Start thinking for yourself for a change and inspect what the article is suggesting as falsification … It is evident the writer of that article does not understand the idea behind falsification and it appears neither do you. if you did you could not have posted that link.

For falsification test to be accurate it needs to be configured such that the base theory is refuted categorically if a certain specific condition is not fulfilled when certain parameters come together.
It has to be an achievable test as a condition.

For example it is clear that one falsification for evolution is to see The act of Creation … That is fine, but no one can configure an experiment to see Creation … In which case it may be a falsification, but it is not a valid test. Likewise, if fossil evidence itself only supports the idea of evolution seeing anything outside the pattern of expected records will not falsify diddly squat … Because there are umpteen ways around the issue of unexpected fossils … As has happened throughout the theory’s lifetime .. New fossils have added problems but not falsification … So the theory becomes modified and not out right rejected … sheesh and then some use your brain please.

Your the one flying in the face established science, contradicting scientists from multiple disciplines, and I’m the one who doesn’t understand? Remind me again what your credentials are please? Everyone is wrong apparently except for u?!? Over 100 years of verifiable evidence to support evolution, with every possible means to undermine it by creationist having failed, here you are presenting the same old tired tactics of a generation of creationists before you and presenting it as nuance!

Fossils are one line of evidence that shows that species change. If there were no such fossils, that would be a falsification. Fossils however are not the only line of evidence. There is also evidence in the make up of our genome. Had you read the two articles I sighted you would have picked up on it. the lack of such evidence would have proven evolution to be false, but that we have such evidence means evolution is not falsified.
And the reason why new fossils force a change in evolutionary time lines? Because new fossils are just that, new! They do not question the core concept of evolution, new fossils do not weaken evolution as a science, it only forces a change in our understanding of the time line of evolution. Evolution itself, the understanding that all creatures have evolved previous species is an established fact supported not just by fossils but multiple other lines of evidence.
There is nothing with google and or copying and pasting relevant articles. Why should I reinvent the wheel. Every one of these arguments has been made and refuted by scientists imminently more qualified then me. In fact googling falsifiability of evolution gives you tons of links because this claim has already been refuted. In fact, the scientist who the creationists cite in making this non falsifiable argument, acknowledged that he was wrong and that evolution is indeed falsifiable…