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

[Med911]

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

[quote="Med911, post:18, topic:265157"]

Really Hmmna? When was the last time you saw pile of mud get up and start dancing? I think a mind devoid of logic/reason and religion don't go together. [/QUOTE

Haha really? So u r contradicting wats in the Quran? And saying your idea of it is more compatible with Islam? U r either a creationist or an evolutionist

I believe evolution is the mechanism through which God created man and continues to create.

To believe that man is literally made out of mud is ridiculous and is the hallmark of illogical and unreasonable mind.

If this came from anywhere else, you would also find it ridiculous. As ridiculous as the old Greek myth of Father Sky and Mother Earth getting it on.

Im trying to avoid insulting you, but this uncompromising belief in the absurd is pretty laughable.

[Med911]

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

Cz they can't be.

Either you believe God is capable of creating everything and doing everything or you don't.

There are many many unseen things in Islam and indeed in every other religion, creating Adam is actually very minor for God, when u see wat he did to ad, samud, the making of heaven , hell, angels, countless more.

I m bored with this now will come back later to our riveting exchange. Have u even read the Quran?

This is was fun, now you can go home Hmmna. i have read the Koran, have you ever used your mind?

[Med911]

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

Just Google how life started, on earth, it will put the mud/clay thing into context : )

I posted some googles to counter Psyahs claim that evolution is non Falsifiable on the previous page. Interesting stuff, you should read it.

[psyah]

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

@Med911

Correct me if I’m wrong and please don’t take this the wrong way, but aren’t you an Engineer, not an evolutionary Biologist??

However, evolution is considered falsifiable by scientists because it can make predictions that, were they contradicted by the evidence, would falsify evolution. Several kinds of evidence have been proposed that could falsify evolution, such as the fossil record showing no change over time, confirmation that mutations are prevented from accumulating, or observations showing organisms being created supernaturally or spontaneously.[SUP][52]](Objections to evolution - Wikipedia)[/SUP] Many of Darwin’s ideas and assertions of fact have been falsified as evolutionary science has developed and has continued to confirm his central concepts.[SUP][54]](Objections to evolution - Wikipedia)[/SUP][SUP][55]](Objections to evolution - Wikipedia)[/SUP] Despite this, creationism consists largely of unsubstantiated claims that evolution has been falsified.[SUP][52]](Objections to evolution - Wikipedia)[/SUP] In contrast, creationist explanations involving the direct intervention of the supernatural in the physical world are not falsifiable, because any result of an experiment or investigation could be the unpredictable action of an omnipotent deity.[SUP][56]](Objections to evolution - Wikipedia)"[/SUP]

A falsification test has to be absolute … Absolute being specific rather what you have said is that evolution changes … If it has changed so much then it is obvious that it is not adequate as a theory.

Now the falsification test this cut and paste is bringing is the above in red … This statement has been written by a novice … Fossils merely show change over time, but they do not differentiate how that change took place … It could be an extinction of one kind of animal and new one takes it’s place … the fossil record is not specific enough to suggest that change comes from speciation. In fact fossil records cannot show a particular animal changes through time … For that you need a video, or a means of detecting parental lineage that such and such a creature is the ancestor of that creature through the many millennia … The fossil record just is not good enough.

Then the green section is saying that Darwin’s theory has been falsified … Again this is nonsense the person who wrote that is a novice … You can’t falsify an aspect of a theory and still continue accepting the base theory … The falsification would be inadequate … Rather what they are admitting to is that evolution has been falsified time and again or more likely compromised and then to protect the base theory they modify it over and again in order to sustain the belief that Creation is not true … They are merely organisms through time developing without external control … Despite this they welcome the likes of yourself who support evolution whilst being Muslim … If they can’t get it all their way they settle for half of it … Not the hardliners though …

Also they say that Creationists say that evolution has been falsified, but I have never said that. … I have always said that evolution has not been falsified because no one has
provided a falsification test … And there are rules for that test to be valid … Basically the main rule is that if the test does not pass … There is no saving the base theory it has to be rejected … Such a test has never been presented by the so called scientific evolutionist community.

[psyah]

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

Well you consider it a dogma.. it's your personal opinion which is contrary to widely accepted "fact" by the science community of the world.

The problem with your story telling is you continue to confuse the "fact" with "theory". You want some laboratory evidence done in a few seconds which could verify or falsify the "theory" of evolution without which you will not recognize the "fact" of evolution. You just want the evidence of your personal liking and consider the overwhelming evidence accepted by world's scientific community and reputable educational institutions as a piece of trash.

There are people in mental asylums who consider themselves Charlie Chaplin or Einstein. We don't consider them as good comedian actors or scientist of Einstein repute no matter how fiercely they believe. In the same way world will continue to believe reputable scientist and educational institutions.. and will continue to consider your uttering as sheer non-sense specially in the matters where science is involved. It's clear that your field of expertise is largely theology and it will be better if you stick your arguments to theology instead of challenging the world reputed educational institutions like Harvard, Yale, Berkeley, Oxford etc. with your science credentials.. who consider evolution as a "fact" and valid "science".. to be taught in these respectable institutions..

Any way please refrain from using your invented words for evolution like "dogma".. You can continue with your adventure of verifying evolution through scriptures.. This subject is not particularly my field of expertise. Good luck with your attempt of trying to bring Jack out of the box..!!!

Yazdi ... What is the evolution fact? Is the statement ..."we know that evolution occurs, but we don't know how" .... As the fact of evolution?

How the hell do they or you know evolution is fact? Enlighten me ...

[diwana]

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

I usually avoid science and Quran arguments but here is something to think about.

creation of man from extract of clay | Christ And Muhammad

It is the “extract of clay” (sulala), and not the clay itself what is said in Quran.

[RIGHT]

[/RIGHT]
Sahih International
And certainly did We create man from an extract of clay.

Professor Emeritus Keith L. Moore (as of 1997) is one of the world’s most prominent scientists in the fields of anatomy and embryology and is the author of the book entitled The Developing Human, which has been translated into eight languages. This book is a scientific reference work and was chosen by a special committee in the United States as the best book authored by one person. Dr. Keith Moore is Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Cell Biology at the University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. There, he was Associate Dean of Basic Sciences at the Faculty of Medicine and for 8 years was the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy. In 1984, he received the most distinguished award presented in the field of anatomy in Canada, the J.C.B. Grant Award from the Canadian Association of Anatomists. He has directed many international associations, such as the Canadian and American Association of Anatomists and the Council of the Union of Biological Sciences.
In 1981, during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, Professor Moore said: “It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the Quran about human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to Muhammad from God, because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me that Muhammad must have been a messenger of God.” (To view the RealPlayer video of this comment click here).

Consequently, Professor Moore was asked the following question: “Does this mean that you believe that the Quran is the word of God?” He replied**: “I find no difficulty in accepting this.”** (In the above tape)

[psyah]

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

The concept that we were created by God is fundamental to Islam. How we were created, the nuts and bolts of evolution is irrelevant to Islam. Its ridiculous to believe that the nuts and bolts of how we were made is of any relevance to anyone other then scientists. I mean I believe most people are satisfied to know that they born of their parents, but I don't think anyone is interested in any further details. Similarly, how God created man, is not as important as the understanding THAT he created man.

EARLY scholars lacked even a rudimentary understanding of science, biology, anatomy, genetics etc. Even a 10 year today would know what a gene is, but early Islamic scholars could never tell you why exactly a child resemble his parent, because thy had no concept of how inheritance worked. They lived over a thousand years ago, why are you assuming they would have the insight of someone living in the modern era?

We credit many early Muslim scientists for their work, but their work is not inconsistent with evolution.

The Quran is NOT a science text book. Let us stop deluding ourselves with such a notion. The koran offers us answers or at least hints to the nature of the spiritual world. It gives us CLUES to our origins. It does not tell us specifics. If all scientific knowledge were enconced within the pages of the Koran, then there would be no need for Scientific study. However we both know that Early Islamic scientists were among the the most respected in the world, and the were the torchbearers of inquiry and invention. Did they somehow forget that all those things they were studying were already explained within the pages of the koran and hence were wasting their time?

My convenient argument is in light of established scientific fact. For me, my understanding of Islam is informed by scientific discovery. If science establishes something to be true, then I don't throw suspicion on the Science, I throw suspicion on my understanding of Islam. You on the other hand have already concluded that you understand Islam, and established science is what is wrong. If God had said the Sun was a burning ball of melted cheese, despite evidence to the contrary, you would still believe the sun were made of cheese and that the science that establishes the sun is a burning ball of Gas is somehow flawed.

If you think Evolution will break the back of Islamic belief then you need to reconsider the strength of your Imaan. If we hold firm to two basic tenets of Islam, that it is a true religion as revealed by God himself, and that this Universe was created by God himself, then if anything, Science should enhance, enrich and compliment your imaan, not weaken it.

Of course it is relevant to know how we were Created ... It is a question in the minds of humanity ... And the answer to this question points out who the authority of our lives is ... Do you not consider why Allah (SWT) said that He fashioned Adam (AS) from sounding clay as important? And if it is a metaphor what a strange and misleading thing to say if ... He really did not fashion him out of clay, but caused him to evolve ...???

You have only made an assertion that Islam is not about "facts" ... But about guidance ... For some reason you think guidance does not involve showing people the truth of a matter. How we are Created is not available to us ... But there are suggestions that evolution cannot be that mechanism ... It is important in the minds of people who are being asked by the Qur'an to "look to creation" ... makhlooq means "that thing that was Created when it was previously not existent"

[psyah]

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

I posted some googles to counter Psyahs claim that evolution is non Falsifiable on the previous page. Interesting stuff, you should read it.

A novice link as shown above

[psyah]

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

Let me cut to the chase ....

med911 or kchughtai or anyone else ... Please show speciation is compatible with the Qur'an ... You claim that evolution is not relevant to Islam ... So you have created a convenient get out clause that neither will you find evolution specifically supported in the Qur'an because it is not relevant, and if anything seems to conflict with evolution ... Well then just dismiss that as a metaphor ... I say there is much evidence that the Qur'an tells us things about our environment and then encouraged us to investigate its claims ... How else are we to investigate if by not using science???

[Med911]

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

A novice link as shown above

Yes... and remind me what it is that makes u such an expert?

[Med911]

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

A falsification test has to be absolute ... Absolute being specific rather what you have said is that evolution changes ... If it has changed so much then it is obvious that it is not adequate as a theory.

Now the falsification test this cut and paste is bringing is the above in red ... This statement has been written by a novice ... Fossils merely show change over time, but they do not differentiate how that change took place ... It could be an extinction of one kind of animal and new one takes it's place ... the fossil record is not specific enough to suggest that change comes from speciation. In fact fossil records cannot show a particular animal changes through time ... For that you need a video, or a means of detecting parental lineage that such and such a creature is the ancestor of that creature through the many millennia ... The fossil record just is not good enough.

Then the green section is saying that Darwin's theory has been falsified ... Again this is nonsense the person who wrote that is a novice ... You can't falsify an aspect of a theory and still continue accepting the base theory ... The falsification would be inadequate ... Rather what they are admitting to is that evolution has been falsified time and again or more likely compromised and then to protect the base theory they modify it over and again in order to sustain the belief that Creation is not true ... They are merely organisms through time developing without external control ... Despite this they welcome the likes of yourself who support evolution whilst being Muslim ... If they can't get it all their way they settle for half of it ... Not the hardliners though ...

Also they say that Creationists say that evolution has been falsified, but I have never said that. ... I have always said that evolution has not been falsified because no one has provided a falsification test ... And there are rules for that test to be valid ... Basically the main rule is that if the test does not pass ... There is no saving the base theory it has to be rejected ... Such a test has never been presented by the so called scientific evolutionist community.

You asked for evidence that the theory of evolution can be falsified. Another words, is there something against which, if shown to be true, the authenticity of evolution as a whole would come into doubt.

I actually gave you two links. In each, we are told that there are a number of things, which if proven to not exist or not be verified, would bring evolution into doubt. If there was no fossil evidence, if there were no genetic or chromosomal evidence etc. All these things do exist, and so while evolution is falsifiable to the extent that were it not for the existence of such evidence, it would have been proven to invalid, that evidence has BEEN found shows that it has not been falsified. Its the lack of evidence to support it that would have made it false. There is no such lack of evidence to disprove it.

The theory has changed, but it has changed in accordance to new evidence. The basic gist of it, the basic concept has not changed. That evolution is real is an established fact, and all evidence has leant weight to it varsity.

I think the Wikilinks Link has a typo there. None the less, I provided a second link that confirms the first. In fact, a basic Google of Is Evolution Falsifiable, gives you a ton of sites to go through. But all say that evolution is a valid science since it can be potentially falsified, even though it has not been.
Darwins theory CAN be falsified, meaning, a theory for which evidence can be presented to disprove it. No evidence has been presented to disprove it. Again, it would be the LACK of evidence that would falsify it. That evidence is NOT lacking. Because there is no evidence to disprove it, instead there is evidence in proof of evolution, means that while as a science Evolution is falsifiable, that it hasn't bee falsified means its valid.

You yourself said any Science worth the name has to be falsifiable. That does not mean that just because a theory is falsifiable, that it must then also be false. Being falsifiable does not automatically mean its has to be false. Your making the extraordinary conclusion that if evolution is falsifiable, it must be a real science, but then it isn't falsified, so there is a grand conspiracy afoot.

[Med911]

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

Let me cut to the chase ....

med911 or kchughtai or anyone else ... Please show speciation is compatible with the Qur'an ... You claim that evolution is not relevant to Islam ... So you have created a convenient get out clause that neither will you find evolution specifically supported in the Qur'an because it is not relevant, and if anything seems to conflict with evolution ... Well then just dismiss that as a metaphor ... I say there is much evidence that the Qur'an tells us things about our environment and then encouraged us to investigate its claims ... How else are we to investigate if by not using science???

My convenient get out clause is for your benefit and every other Muslims. The burden of proof isn't on those that believe in Science. Its you who has to prove that Islam is compatible with reality (i.e. Evolution) not me. I have shown you that Islam leaves the door open to accepting evolution and you don't have to disregard one or the other. You can be a devout muslim and still believe in Evolution. Its you who is complicating things needlessly. You yourself say your not a literalist, but now we should ignore scientific evidence and accept the Koran is literal!

I believe the Koran gives us clues to the nature of our environment and asks us to investigate further. We investigated further and came across tons of evidence to support evolution as the mechanism of creation. Now you want us to abandon all of that and go back to believing we were all created as we are from a pile of mud?

And evolution is science. i even gave you link stating that evolution is Falsifiable. Hence its a valid science by your definition. Even the person on whom most creationist based the "nonFalsifiable" argument, himself acknowledged that evolution was indeed falsifiable. Go back and read my second article.

[Med911]

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

Of course it is relevant to know how we were Created ... It is a question in the minds of humanity ... And the answer to this question points out who the authority of our lives is ... Do you not consider why Allah (SWT) said that He fashioned Adam (AS) from sounding clay as important? And if it is a metaphor what a strange and misleading thing to say if ... He really did not fashion him out of clay, but caused him to evolve ...???

You have only made an assertion that Islam is not about "facts" ... But about guidance ... For some reason you think guidance does not involve showing people the truth of a matter. How we are Created is not available to us ... But there are suggestions that evolution cannot be that mechanism ... It is important in the minds of people who are being asked by the Qur'an to "look to creation" ... makhlooq means "that thing that was Created when it was previously not existent"

Sure it important, but that wasn't the intent of the Koran. The intent of the Koran was to establish moral guidance, ethical behavior, a just society. It is NOT a science text.
But of course our origins are important. As YOU said, God gave us hints and then told us to go out and seek out the details. Harness the powers of our intellect to find the details to things God only hinted at in the Koran.

Sure I consider why Allah SWT said he created Adam from clay. But there are a multiple of interpretations that can be made of it. none of those interpretation however need contradict facts of evolution. Any interpretation you make should be in light of FACTS. Evolution is a FACT, and you cannot interpret Islam without factoring in the FACT of evolution.

Islam is about MORAL and ETHICAL TRUTH. Its is not about Scientific truth. Scientific truth is something we are instructed to seek out ourselves. If you are trying to teach a child morality, say for example, I want to teach a child that there is a moral imperative for Muslim to get married and have children... Will I explain to him WHY marriage is such an important institute and why we are told to have children, or should I tell him about the birds and the bees and technical details of child birth? Obviously if my objective is moral guidance, technical details are not as important as the message itself. The Koran is giving us lessons of Morality, the technical details are not important within that context, but are important as a whole. So while God did no elucidate on the details of creations, He does instruct us to go beyond and find answers on our own through discovery.

The term Makhlooq means that "Thing." So what is that thing. That we are not told EXACTLY what that thing is, leaves the door open to discovery.

[Med911]

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

Yazdi ... What is the evolution fact? Is the statement ..."we know that evolution occurs, but we don't know how" .... As the fact of evolution?

How the hell do they or you know evolution is fact? Enlighten me ...

A fact is one that is shown to be true by multiple sources of corroborating evidence. The preponderance of evidence tells us that evolution is fact. Now you can put unreasonable demands on such evidence because you have a vested interest (because you believe this would contradict your religious belief) in seeing it disproven, but for those of us who aren't threatened by evolution, we have the luxury of being free to study the beauty and elegance of evolution without the hindrance of stubborn dogma. When so much evidence is telling you something is true, and there is no evidence that exists to negate that evidence, then any reasonable person would understand it to be fact.

You would like to see speciation, a cow turning into an whale, first hand, and aren't going to be convinced till a time machine is invented. The reasonable among us conclude that there is point at which denial of the evidence is futile. If something barks like a dog and smells like a dog, its probably not a chicken.

[psyah]

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

Yes... and remind me what it is that makes u such an expert?

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.

[psyah]

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

You asked for evidence that the theory of evolution can be falsified. Another words, is there something against which, if shown to be true, the authenticity of evolution as a whole would come into doubt.

I actually gave you two links. In each, we are told that there are a number of things, which if proven to not exist or not be verified, would bring evolution into doubt. If there was no fossil evidence, if there were no genetic or chromosomal evidence etc. All these things do exist, and so while evolution is falsifiable to the extent that were it not for the existence of such evidence, it would have been proven to invalid, that evidence has BEEN found shows that it has not been falsified. Its the lack of evidence to support it that would have made it false. There is no such lack of evidence to disprove it.

The theory has changed, but it has changed in accordance to new evidence. The basic gist of it, the basic concept has not changed. That evolution is real is an established fact, and all evidence has leant weight to it varsity.

I think the Wikilinks Link has a typo there. None the less, I provided a second link that confirms the first. In fact, a basic Google of Is Evolution Falsifiable, gives you a ton of sites to go through. But all say that evolution is a valid science since it can be potentially falsified, even though it has not been. Darwins theory CAN be falsified, meaning, a theory for which evidence can be presented to disprove it. No evidence has been presented to disprove it. Again, it would be the LACK of evidence that would falsify it. That evidence is NOT lacking. Because there is no evidence to disprove it, instead there is evidence in proof of evolution, means that while as a science Evolution is falsifiable, that it hasn't bee falsified means its valid.

You yourself said any Science worth the name has to be falsifiable. That does not mean that just because a theory is falsifiable, that it must then also be false. Being falsifiable does not automatically mean its has to be false. Your making the extraordinary conclusion that if evolution is falsifiable, it must be a real science, but then it isn't falsified, so there is a grand conspiracy afoot.

You see doubt is not confirmation of falsehood ... It is merely doubt.

[psyah]

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

Sure it important, but that wasn't the intent of the Koran. The intent of the Koran was to establish moral guidance, ethical behavior, a just society. It is NOT a science text. But of course our origins are important. As YOU said, God gave us hints and then told us to go out and seek out the details. Harness the powers of our intellect to find the details to things God only hinted at in the Koran.

Sure I consider why Allah SWT said he created Adam from clay. But there are a multiple of interpretations that can be made of it. none of those interpretation however need contradict facts of evolution. Any interpretation you make should be in light of FACTS. Evolution is a FACT, and you cannot interpret Islam without factoring in the FACT of evolution.

Islam is about MORAL and ETHICAL TRUTH. Its is not about Scientific truth. Scientific truth is something we are instructed to seek out ourselves. If you are trying to teach a child morality, say for example, I want to teach a child that there is a moral imperative for Muslim to get married and have children... Will I explain to him WHY marriage is such an important institute and why we are told to have children, or should I tell him about the birds and the bees and technical details of child birth? Obviously if my objective is moral guidance, technical details are not as important as the message itself. The Koran is giving us lessons of Morality, the technical details are not important within that context, but are important as a whole. So while God did no elucidate on the details of creations, He does instruct us to go beyond and find answers on our own through discovery.

The term Makhlooq means that "Thing." So what is that thing. That we are not told EXACTLY what that thing is, leaves the door open to discovery.

Makhlooq means created thing from a previous non-existent state ... It comes from the root word Khalaqa ... And Khaaliq is also from this root ... The word for thing in Arabic is shay ...

You think by saying that the intent of the Qur'an was for moral guidance removes elements of absolute truth ... Unlike poetry the Qur'an being the word of Allah (SWT) is also a sign of its authenticity ... By providing insight to actual happenings in the universe ... And then science to come over and provide a verification of what was said ... Science will never, because to date it has never, provided a fact of occurrence that goes against the Qur'an ...

Unlike poetry where literal accuracy is not important, if the allegory works it is acceptable, but with the Qur'an the allegorical meaning will only be SUPPORTED by its literal sense and it will not oppose it at all.

For example the Qur'an refers to the Striaght Path ... This path is a metaphorical path ... But physically straightness is the shortest distance between two places ... And two places are physically connected by a path ... Just as straightness can be applied to a metaphorical path ... As the best way to get to Allah (SWT) it is also the most efficient way to go physically between two points in space.

And this pattern repeats itself throughout the Qur'an ...

[The_Jinx]

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

This is was fun, now you can go home Hmmna. i have read the Koran, have you ever used your mind?

[note]I want to remind everyone that while everyone has right to his/her opinion and that we are really having a great discussion, please keep in mind that rules of decency always apply. Please be respectful and state your views without getting personal.

Thanks.[/note]

[Med911]

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

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...

[MirwaisHotak]

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

Yes God did an excellent job of explaining evolution to ancient Arabs. So well in fact that YOU, a Muslim living in the 21st century still haven't figured it out!

By the way, while God was at it teaching those ancient Arabs evolution, he might have mentioned some other Scientific tid bits that could have impacted our lives. For example, did he forget to mention how we could isolate parts of bacterium's and viruses and use them to vaccinate the populous against disease?! Did he forget to mention how diseases like Bubonic plaque were spread, even though it managed to kill millions of people across the world even up to the early 20th century? I mean, the all knowing all wise Allah SWT could easily have imparted tomes of scientific knowledge to the Arabs, and yet here we are, still trying to eradicate Polio in the ISLAMIC republic of Pakistan!

Why are you purposely misquoting me. I was quoting you when you said God couldn't explain evolution to arabs. I was merely pointing out the foolishness of applying limits to an all powerful being. If you want to perform mental gymnastics to make islam and evolution compatible, your better served in taking out the whole God explained it to the arabs the only way they would understand routine as its illogical. If god wanted to explain evolution to arabs he would have, but the only thing the Koran says is that man was made from clay.

Also, I don't know what your trying to get across with the second paragraph. God works in mysterious ways. Apparently when Prophet Elisha was walking up a mountain he was ridiculed by a group of youths for being bald. God decided to send bears to attack and kill all 42 youths right there on the spot. Don't ask me why God considered this more important than say teaching humans about Germ theory.