Changes

== Falsifiability ==

== Falsifiability ==

''Main article: [[Falsifiability]]''

{{main|Falsifiability}}

[[Falsifiability]] is a commonly used criterion to determine whether a particular proposition is [[science|scientific]] or non-scientific.  Essentially, a proposition is considered "scientific" if it ''could'' be proven wrong by experiment, but no experiment has proven it false.   

[[Falsifiability]] is a commonly used criterion to determine whether a particular proposition is [[science|scientific]] or non-scientific.  Essentially, a proposition is considered "scientific" if it ''could'' be proven wrong by experiment, but no experiment has proven it false.   

In 1949<ref>{{hnb|Dewar, Davies and Haldane|1949|p=90}}, quoted in {{hnb|Sarfati|2001}} </ref>, J.B.S. Haldane proposed that evolution could be falsified if "various mechanisms, such as the wheel and magnet, which would be useless till fairly perfect" were found in nature.  Creationists typically respond by pointing out that wheels and magnets have been found in nature.

In 1949<ref>{{hnb|Dewar, Davies and Haldane|1949|p=90}}, quoted in {{hnb|Sarfati|2001}} </ref>, J.B.S. Haldane proposed that evolution could be falsified if "various mechanisms, such as the wheel and magnet, which would be useless till fairly perfect" were found in nature.  Creationists typically respond by pointing out that wheels and magnets have been found in nature.

Another proposed test has been dubbed instances of "[[irreducible complexity]]."  Essentially, since evolution requires a step-wise development in which each variation is advantageous enough to survival to spread throughout the genepool, then evolution with respect to a particular biological structure could be falsified if the components of that organ were found to be totally useless unless already put together.  Creationists and Intelligent Design advocates have proposed a number of such structures, including the eye, the cilia of cells, the enzymes involved in human blood clotting, etc.  Evolutionists typically respond along the lines of proposing a potential line of development (without evidence that the line of development actually occurred, because the alleged development occurred long before scientific observation).  Therefore, some have concluded that this is not a meaningful falsification of the theory, because hypothetical lines of development can be proposed to answer the challenge, and those hypothetical lines of development are not themselves testable.

Another proposed test has been dubbed instances of "[[irreducible complexity]]."  Essentially, since evolution requires a step-wise development in which each variation is advantageous enough to survival to spread throughout the gene pool, then evolution with respect to a particular biological structure could be falsified if the components of that organ were found to be totally useless unless already put together.  Creationists and Intelligent Design advocates have proposed a number of such structures, including the eye, the cilia of cells, the enzymes involved in human blood clotting, etc.  Evolutionists typically respond along the lines of proposing a potential line of development (without evidence that the line of development actually occurred, because the alleged development occurred long before scientific observation).  Therefore, some have concluded that this is not a meaningful falsification of the theory, because hypothetical lines of development can be proposed to answer the challenge, and those hypothetical lines of development are not themselves testable.

Another test that he proposed was that the discovery of rabbits in [[Precambrian]] strata would disprove evolution.<ref>Ridley, M (2003). Evolution, Third Edition. Blackwell Publishing Limited.</ref>

Another test that he proposed was that the discovery of rabbits in [[Precambrian]] strata would disprove evolution.<ref>Ridley, M (2003). Evolution, Third Edition. Blackwell Publishing Limited.</ref>