Intelligent Design Falsifiability

[benjdm]

Anyone willing to take a few seconds to help me in a discussion with a friend of mine:

Would the successful creation of life from non-life (a collection of elements / compounds) falsify the theory of intelligent design ?

 

[Uphill Battle]

posted in your deleted thread.


You're likely going to have to settle among everyone what "life" would qualify.

 

[Matthew777]

Would the successful creation of life from non-life (a collection of elements / compounds) falsify the theory of intelligent design ?

No, it would not. Of course, that would require an intelligent designer (a human being). Besides, that would be evidence for abiogenesis, not evolution.
All one must do to falsify ID is show the evidence for common descent and how natural selection works.

Peace.

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

ID isn't falsifiable... that's why its not science. Even if anything, inculding abiogenesis or common descent were demonstrated beyond the ability of even creationists to rationalize away, a IDiot could still say that the process demonstrated was controlled by an intelligent designer

 

[Uphill Battle]

ID isn't falsifiable... that's why its not science. Even if anything, inculding abiogenesis or common descent were demonstrated beyond the ability of even creationists to rationalize away, a IDiot could still say that the process demonstrated was controlled by an intelligent designer

Let's not refer to Abiogenesis as science either then... hmmmn?

 

[Aggie]

All one must do to falsify ID is show the evidence for common descent and how natural selection works.

I actually agree with this, but by that definition it’s been falsified already. It just isn’t as blatantly obvious how it’s been falsified as it is with YEC.

 

[Electric Sceptic]

Let's not refer to Abiogenesis as science either then... hmmmn?

Umm...sorry, we will, because it IS science.

 

[Grengor]

I voted that it wouldn't, and that it's not science. Id isn't science, maybe we need a hammer to get that through some of the more thick skulled people in kansas, eh?

 

[TheBigAl]

I voted that it wouldn't, and that it's not science. Id isn't science, maybe we need a hammer to get that through some of the more thick skulled people in kansas, eh?

Or a wrecking ball.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Umm...sorry, we will, because it IS science.

really? How do you propose to falsify it?

 

[Electric Sceptic]

really? How do you propose to falsify it?

Falsification isn't the single criteria for something to be science, you know.

 

[Lucretius]

You cant falsify ID because it isn't science, so no, it would not be falsified, because it is not science.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Falsification isn't the single criteria for something to be science, you know.

really. you can't have your cake and eat it too, bud.

 

[nvxplorer]

Let's not refer to Abiogenesis as science either then... hmmmn?

Abiogenesis as a theory or hypothesis can be tested and falsified, which is why it is science. ID cannot.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Abiogenesis as a theory or hypothesis can be tested and falsified, which is why it is science. ID cannot.

please tell me how you propose Abiogenesis can be falsified.

 

[funyun]

Uphill Battle,

If we figured out exactly the chemicals that would, in theory, be needed to start the kind of process that leads to abiogenesis, and then we put all of these chemicals together in any and all theorized mixtures, combinations, and/or sequences, and then we ran this test over and over again and nothing happened, it would falsify abiogenesis.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Uphill Battle,

If we figured out exactly the chemicals that would, in theory, be needed to start the kind of process that leads to abiogenesis, and then we put all of these chemicals together in any and all theorized mixtures, combinations, and/or sequences, and then we ran this test over and over again and nothing happened, it would falsify abiogenesis.

nah... You'd always find someone else who was willing to give it another try.

 

[funyun]

nah... You'd always find someone else who was willing to give it another try.

Just like you always find someone else who wants to give ID another try. That doesn't mean that has merit.

 

[TeddyKGB]

nah... You'd always find someone else who was willing to give it another try.

There is no such theory as "abiogenesis." "Life from non-life" is a descriptor for a class of hypotheses.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Just like you always find someone else who wants to give ID another try. That doesn't mean that has merit.

but somehow the notion of Abiogenesis does?