Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Double Standard: False tautology
Line 595: Line 595:     
:I recall Johnson or someone writing that ID could be falsified by proving evolution, by the way. So could you contribute a bit to [[Evidence for evolution]] or [[Proof of evolution]]? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 08:48, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:I recall Johnson or someone writing that ID could be falsified by proving evolution, by the way. So could you contribute a bit to [[Evidence for evolution]] or [[Proof of evolution]]? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 08:48, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
::I've written plenty about the [[falsifiability of evolution]] on the relevant page.  Intelligent design as a theory is not falsifiable because it's built on a negation;  the theory essentially states that if we can't figure out a plausible way that an organism evolved, it must have been designed.  However, the fact that we do not currently understand how an organism evolved does not preclude us from figuring it out in the future, so lack of understanding = evidence of design is a false tautology.  [[User:Xyrophile|Xyrophile]] 18:18, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
60

edits

Navigation menu