How can Evolution be falsified?

[xianghua]

"There is no reason why we would expect a designer to give vertebrates a blind spot in their eyes, while an octopus doesn't have that problem.

In evolutionary context, this however makes perfect sense."

are you sure? are you aware about the fact that octopus is a color blind?

 

[essentialsaltes]

"There is no reason why we would expect a designer to give vertebrates a blind spot in their eyes, while an octopus doesn't have that problem.

In evolutionary context, this however makes perfect sense."

are you sure? are you aware about the fact that octopus is a color blind?

Yes, it makes sense. And color blindness has nothing to do with the blind spot.

There is no reason why we would expect a designer to give humans three color vision, while goldfish have four color vision.

 

[xianghua]

Yes, it makes sense. And color blindness has nothing to do with the blind spot.

There is no reason why we would expect a designer to give humans three color vision, while goldfish have four color vision.

octopus living under the water. it may have a conection.

 

[essentialsaltes]

octopus living under the water. it may have a conection.

Maybe it does, but that connection may have an evolutionary context.

 

[xianghua]

Maybe it does, but that connection may have an evolutionary context.

or a design context.

 

[HitchSlap]

look above: he isnt.

So you believe Dr. Shubin was extremely lucky in choosing the correct geographical location to find a 375 myo "fishapod," even though ToE would predict a tetrapod should be found in 375myo strata?

Livin' on the edge, huh?

 

[HitchSlap]

or a design context.

I see no reason to assume a designer, and every field of biology has done quite well without this extraneous concept.

 

[Loudmouth]

"There is no reason why we would expect a designer to give vertebrates a blind spot in their eyes, while an octopus doesn't have that problem.

In evolutionary context, this however makes perfect sense."

are you sure? are you aware about the fact that octopus is a color blind?

One eye has the cells facing backwards so that the nerves have to first go towards the front of the eye before they punch through the retina and go back to the brain.

The other eye has the cells in the retina facing forward and the nerves exiting straight out the back of the retina.

All animals with a back bone have the backwards facing retina.

All the animals with 8 to 12 arms and no back boen have the forward facing retina.

There is no reason that a designer would be forced to give everything with back bones a backwards facing retina. A designer could give some vertebrates a backwards facing retina and some other vertebrates a forward facing retina. Only with evolution would you expect to see lineage specific adaptations.

 

[Loudmouth]

octopus living under the water. it may have a conection.

Vertebrate fish in the very same environment have a backwards facing retina.

 

[Aryeh]

How can Evolution be falsified?

I think the fact that in nature there are no observations of species developing into higher species would falsify it.

Anything can be falsified.

Moreover, anyone can be deceived - even by their own eyes.

When we understand there are no numbers, no shapes, no time, etc. - and that all of that is an illusion created to help us finite creatures understand what is blatantly infinite - then it will be easier to gauge reality from beautiful illusion.

Evolution is a solution; it is not the unique solution. Mathematicians understand how important the uniqueness of a solution is - it is like the perfect key (not skeleton) that fits into ONLY one perfect slot. Evolution is not this, but it works for its philosophical base of origins.

 

[Loudmouth]

Anything can be falsified.

Moreover, anyone can be deceived - even by their own eyes.

When we understand there are no numbers, no shapes, no time, etc. - and that all of that is an illusion created to help us finite creatures understand what is blatantly infinite - then it will be easier to gauge reality from beautiful illusion.

Evolution is a solution; it is not the unique solution. Mathematicians understand how important the uniqueness of a solution is - it is like the perfect key (not skeleton) that fits into ONLY one perfect slot. Evolution is not this, but it works for its philosophical base of origins.

Why doesn't evolution work as a scientific explanation for biodiversity?

 

[Aryeh]

Why doesn't evolution work as a scientific explanation for biodiversity?

Ah, ok.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Romans 2: 12 For all those who sinned without law will also perish without law; but all those who sinned under law will be judged by law. 13 For the hearers of law are not the ones righteous before God, but the doers of law will be declared righteous. 14 For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. 15 They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them, and by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused.
That passage deals with those who have never been given the law but who act in a good an moral way. It doesn't say anything about rejecting the existence of God. I would say that in your case, since you've been given the information and reject it, that you won't be extended the latitude of those who never heard the law.

I don't reject god, I want to believe yet don't AGAINST my own personal will. Belief is not fully one's conscious choice, I can't make myself belief something just because I want to.

You get to Hell because of your will, not God's.

Except not being a believer is honestly not my will.

Extreme sins receive extreme punishment.

That's never stated in the bible, in fact, it is heavily implied that Yahweh views lying and murder as equivalent to each other. All sins are equal in the eyes of the lord. Basically, any imperfection without belief earns you the same torment and lake of fire.

I have no idea what you do. However, if you want to learn about God, find a good church; preferably one small enough where you can go talk to the minister. I could talk to you about God but I'm pixels on a message board. You need to sit down one on one with someone who can walk you through he Bible and show you step by step how the Bible validates itself.

I've been a member of a handful of churches... the experiences were a bit mixed, and none helped. BTW, Jesus talks negatively about such organized worship in the bible, so, possibly not the best route.

Also, I don't need the bible to be 100% right to be a believer, and I think the people that do have weak faith.

 

[PsychoSarah]

My grandmother did not convert until she was 100 years old. Her last year could have been her best because she finally had the peace of God in her life.

That equates to absolutely no comfort on my part. You do know plenty of seekers die atheists, right?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Anything can be falsified.

Not true. The existence of life outside of our solar system cannot be falsified, because it would be impossible to check the whole universe. In fact, it is so common for proposals to be non-falsifiable that people need to be careful not to accidentally do it.

Moreover, anyone can be deceived - even by their own eyes.

This is true, hence why experiments are performed thousands of times by different people to verify results.

When we understand there are no numbers, no shapes, no time, etc. - and that all of that is an illusion created to help us finite creatures understand what is blatantly infinite - then it will be easier to gauge reality from beautiful illusion.

This is not some fact about the universe, just your own take on it. You can't demonstrate that any of this is an illusion.

Evolution is a solution; it is not the unique solution. Mathematicians understand how important the uniqueness of a solution is - it is like the perfect key (not skeleton) that fits into ONLY one perfect slot. Evolution is not this, but it works for its philosophical base of origins.

Evolution has no philosophy, nor is it about origins. It is an explanation of the observation that populations of interbreeding organisms change over time.

 

[essentialsaltes]

or a design context.

That's right. Your observation is useless for determining which is correct.

 

[USincognito]

Nested hierarchies are among the machinations of man.
We group animals and plants into categories and then subcategories according to their characteristics and then say, "Look! This proves evolution." Indeed not. It proves that we studied enough about each species that we can chuck it into a slot based on our notion of how things came about. Wait... this bat is a strange bird. It shares characteristics of a flying mammal. Voila! A transition between birds and mammals!

No, sorry. It's a bat.

We aren't seeing common descent at all. We see a common Creator creating similar creatures from the same elements at the same time with the same blueprint for life to serve many unique purposes. The classification is man made.

How do we falsify common design? If you can't tell us how, it's not scientific.

 

[joshua 1 9]

That equates to absolutely no comfort on my part. You do know plenty of seekers die atheists, right?

No I do not know that because the Bible says: "Seek and you shall find". "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you". Matthew 7:7 FYI the Holy Spirit of God is our Comforter.

John 14:26King James Version (KJV)
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it sees him not, neither knows him: but you know him; for he dwells with you, and shall be in you.

 

[xianghua]

So you believe Dr. Shubin was extremely lucky in choosing the correct geographical location to find a 375 myo "fishapod," even though ToE would predict a tetrapod should be found in 375myo strata?

Livin' on the edge, huh?

he doesnt:

Sequences, stratigraphy and scenarios: what can we say about the fossil record of the earliest tetrapods? | Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences

"Using Hedman's [13] method, we estimate an origin for digited tetrapods at 403.6 Ma (early Emsian), with a two-tailed 95 per cent credible interval of 427.4–395.7 Myr ago"

 

[xianghua]

"[QUOTE} There is no reason that a designer would be forced to give everything with back bones a backwards facing retina. A designer could give some vertebrates a backwards facing retina and some other vertebrates a forward facing retina. Only with evolution would you expect to see lineage specific adaptations.[/QUOTE]"


dont be so sure:

Evolution gave flawed eye better vision

"
IT LOOKS wrong, but the strange, “backwards” structure of the vertebrate retina actually improves vision.

Certain cells act as optical fibres, and rather than being just a workaround to make up for the eye’s peculiarities, they help filter and focus light, making images clearer and keeping colours sharp."

Retina - Wikipedia

"This shows that the inverted retina is an adaptation to deliver abundant quantities of oxygen to the retina commensurate with its high energy demands and provide it with good maintenance by the retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) cells against photo-oxidative damage"

so it may be a design feature after all.