What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?

[Astrid]

Fossils show a progression of evolution from the simple to the complex. Fossils also predict future fossils.


See:
Does the punctuated equilibrium theory refute evolution?
and
Lies, Damned Lies and Quote Mines | Gould, Eldredge and Punctuated Equilibria Quotes

The thing about "fully formed" is just garbage, freshly
stinking from the creationist site that supplied it.
Nobody seems able to say what a "not- fully- formed"
organism might be.

 

[VirOptimus]

24 August 2006 -- also known as Pluto Demoted Day



SOURCE

Along with a death certificate.

SOURCE: Ibid ... or op. cit. ... or whatever you call it.

Get over it.

 

[Astrid]

Then you think it was a conspiracy. OK!

By a vote among the scientists. The majority voted for reclassification.

Good grief. Pluto is tiny and a gazillion miles away.
Let's see if the critics can peer at an apple from a mile away
and see if it more resembles a nacintosh or fuji.

That science got a spacecraft to cruise by and
take photos is given no credit.

 

[Frank Robert]

When did Pluto get demoted? It just got its designation changed.

I have no idea and its not anything that I need to be concerned about as it's only a label.

 

[AV1611VET]

I certainly agree that the chance that ToE is fundamentally false would be vanishing small.

Really?

You mean like 1 in 10 to the 89,900th* power that evolution's kick-starter (abiogenesis) happened?

* SOURCE

 

[Speedwell]

Good grief. Pluto is tiny and a gazillion miles away.
Let's see if the critics can peer at an apple from a mile away
and see if it more resembles a nacintosh or fuji.

That science got a spacecraft to cruise by and
take photos is given no credit.

No, they've got to stick with whatever creationists vaguely remember being taught in junior high school or they're being duplicitous.

 

[AV1611VET]

Let's see if the critics can peer at an apple from a mile away and see if it more resembles a Macintosh or Fuji.

I can't. I'm myopic.

 

[Speedwell]

Really?

You mean like 1 in 10 to the 89,900th* power that evolution's kick-starter (abiogenesis) happened?

* SOURCE

Bad math based on an intentional misrepresentation of the underlying science. Wow. That's really persuasive.

 

[Astrid]

No, they've got to stick with whatever creationists vaguely remember being taught in junior high school or they're being duplicitous.

Well, ya get a gaggle of geese, a herd of cows, and a duplicity of creationists.

 

[Frank Robert]

Really?

You mean like 1 in 10 to the 89,900th* power that evolution's kick-starter (abiogenesis) happened?

* SOURCE

You and they are making the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have no idea and its not anything that I need to be concerned about as it's only a label.

To each his own.

Others, including prominent scientists, take it seriously.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, they've got to stick with whatever creationists vaguely remember being taught in junior high school or they're being duplicitous.

You just remember that every 24th of August, when Pluto Demoted Day comes around.

 

[Speedwell]

To each his own.

Others, including prominent scientists, take it seriously.

Tell me, then, which prominent scientists believe that the change in Pluto's designation actually changed something physical about it.

 

[Frank Robert]

To each his own.

Others, including prominent scientists, take it seriously.

I am sure they would because it effects how planets are classified which they have a vested interest in. I am not concerned about the label because it is not a hypothesis that can be tested so it not something that there is evidence for one way or another.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, ya get a gaggle of geese, a herd of cows, and a duplicity of creationists.

I've always used the term: "shrewdness of scientists" in my posts.

Here's just one example of ten pages of examples:

Sure -- where in the world did the press get this story from in the first place?

Did a shrewdness of scientists suddenly jump on the telephone to avoid becoming victims of the publish-or-perish principle, or were journalists crawling all around inside CERN, waiting for two Pb ions (Pb[sup]+[/sup] ?) to collide head-on?

 

[AV1611VET]

You and they are making the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

Of course we are.

 

[AV1611VET]

Tell me, then, which prominent scientists believe that the change in Pluto's designation actually changed something physical about it.

There was no physical change to Pluto, and you know it. The change was done on paper.

By a rigged vote.

If it was so clear-cut:

1. Why do other prominent scientists disagree with Pluto's demotion?
2. Why was the vote rigged?
3. Why are the legislatures of New Mexico, California, and [some other state] arguing about it?
4. Why did "Plutoed" become the word-of-the-year by the American Dialect Society to spite what happened?

 

[AV1611VET]

I am sure they would because it effects how planets are classified which they have a vested interest in. I am not concerned about the label because it is not a hypothesis that can be tested so it not something that there is evidence for one way or another.

Just keep in mind that scientists playing footsie with labels can get people killed.

 

[Speedwell]

There was no physical change to Pluto, and you know it. The change was done on paper.

By a rigged vote.

If it was so clear-cut:

1. Why do other prominent scientists disagree with Pluto's demotion?
2. Why was the vote rigged?
3. Why are the legislatures of New Mexico, California, and [some other state] arguing about it?
4. Why did "Plutoed" become the word-of-the-year by the American Dialect Society to spite what happened?

5. Why do you care?

 

[Frank Robert]

There was no physical change to Pluto, and you know it. The change was done on paper.

By a rigged vote.

If it was so clear-cut:

1. Why do other prominent scientists disagree with Pluto's demotion?
2. Why was the vote rigged?
3. Why are the legislatures of New Mexico, California, and [some other state] arguing about it?
4. Why did "Plutoed" become the word-of-the-year by the American Dialect Society to spite what happened?

1. It is not unusual for scientists to disagree, especially about things that can not be tested
2. If it was rigged it was likely due to a power play. There are bad actors in all professions.
3. What group was responsible for getting the politicians arguing. We know that religious groups are very good at doing that.
4. Ask them

 

[Frank Robert]

Just keep in mind that scientists playing footsie with labels can get people killed.

You probably have some obscure case in which that may have happened so let's hear about it.