nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 14:
Line 14: − + + +
User:Philip J. Rayment/Creationism (view source)
Revision as of 15:51, April 17, 2007
, 15:51, April 17, 2007→Basic concept: Another evolutionist who admits that evolution is not testable.
However, neither can anybody formulate any scientific test of whether the basic concept of goo-to-you evolution, or at least its underlying premise of naturalism, is falsifiable.
However, neither can anybody formulate any scientific test of whether the basic concept of goo-to-you evolution, or at least its underlying premise of naturalism, is falsifiable.
Evolutionists will sometimes propose ways in which evolution could be falsified, but whether their proposals actually would is another matter. I have responded to some such proposals [[Conservapedia talk:Falsifiability Challenge|here]].
Evolutionists will sometimes propose ways in which evolution could be falsified, but whether their proposals actually would is another matter. I have responded to some such proposals [[Conservapedia talk:Falsifiability Challenge|here]]. That includes two quotes from three evolutionists acknowledging that evolution is not testable (i.e. not falsifiable). Here is another one:
{{QuoteBox|Biologists are simply naïve when they talk about experiments designed to test the theory of evolution. It is not testable. They may happen to stumble across facts which would seem to conflict with its predictions. These facts will invariably be ignored and their discoverers will undoubtedly be deprived of continuing research grants.}}
:—Dr Whitten, Professor of Genetics at the University of Melbourne, 1980. [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4978]
So creationism and evolution are both in the same situation in that regard.
So creationism and evolution are both in the same situation in that regard.