Your Thoughts on Creation & Evolution

[DogmaHunter]

evolution is unfalsifiable too. so evolution isnt science either.

Evolution is falsifiable in a multitude of ways.
Your misrepresentations, notwithstanding

 

[xianghua]

Sorry about the language. I'll try to be clear.

its ok. its just a general note since i dont check every word in the dictionary.

Once speciation has occurred, it is by definition a new species.

true. but there is a difference between a species and a family for instance. a new species is still basically the same creature. so we may get a new species of a cat, but its still be a cat and not something else.

there aren't magical/super natural lines that need to be crossed.

actually there is. for instance: if we will have a self replicating molecule, it will not evolve stepwise into a walking robot for instance. since there are no small steps into a robot.

 

[pitabread]

One problem yours is not a real rope, it's a pretend one, one imagined, conjecture, an assumed rope, or something I'm certainly not going to put my faith in....huge difference.

Who is asking for faith in anything?

Scientific theories aren't about faith, they are about understanding. It's purely about knowledge acquisition, nothing else.

 

[xianghua]

Bunnies in the Precambrian

why such a fossil will falsify evolution? we can claim that that fossil somehow get into the wrong layer or something. evolution cant be falsify even in this case. so no.

 

[Speedwell]

its ok. its just a general note since i dont check every word in the dictionary.




true. but there is a difference between a species and a family for instance. a new species is still basically the same creature. so we may get a new species of a cat, but its still be a cat and not something else.



actually there is. for instance: if we will have a self replicating molecule, it will not evolve stepwise into a walking robot for instance. since there are no small steps into a robot.

So basically what you are saying seems to be that you have no idea whatever about how evolution occurs. You have no idea how the repeated branching of speciation can create new families of creatures. You have no idea of how a stochastic process works to produce novel structures.

 

[xianghua]

I have JUST informed you that in evolution such a thing does NOT happen.

Just how big a of a troll are you?

off course i talking about population and not about individual. so according to evolution a population of cats can evolve into something that isnt a cat after millions of years. right?

 

[Speedwell]

why such a fossil will falsify evolution? we can claim that that fossil somehow get into the wrong layer or something. evolution cant be falsify even in this case. so no.

You might be able to make such a false claim. An honest scientist could not.

 

[pitabread]

why such a fossil will falsify evolution? we can claim that that fossil somehow get into the wrong layer or something. evolution cant be falsify even in this case. so no.

I wouldn't read too much into that comment, since it's somewhat of a sarcastic response to the idea of falsifying evolution. And you are right. A single out-of-order fossil would probably be regarded as an anomaly rather than a wholesale falsification of the entire theory of evolution.

To truly falsify our understanding of historical evolution of species, what we'd really expect to find is a whole lot of fossils completely mixed up. In fact, if all lifeforms were created at roughly the same time (per creationists), then we'd expect the fossil record to reflect that. Fossils shouldn't be sorted by geological ages.

Unfortunately we don't really find the latter (and no, any of the examples you are about to post like Tiktaalik or whale evolution don't count either since they aren't truly "out of order" in an evolutionary sense).

 

[xianghua]

No. Can you tell from the picture whether it is a naturally occurring object or not?

yes. since nature cant produce such a flying object this is the product of design.

 

[Skreeper]

yes. since nature cant produce such a flying object this is the product of design.

How do you know nature can't produce whatever that thing is?

 

[VirOptimus]

so how i can falsify evolution?

I dont think you can as its incredibly well-supported. But you have already been told several ways that, if found, would falsify the ToE.

Why keep asking questions that has already been answered,

 

[xianghua]

So basically what you are saying seems to be that you have no idea whatever about how evolution occurs. You have no idea how the repeated branching of speciation can create new families of creatures. You have no idea of how a stochastic process works to produce novel structures.

actually you are the one who have no idea since you cant prove that one kind of creature (population of creatures) can change into another kind.

 

[pitabread]

actually you are the one who have no idea since you cant prove that one kind of creature (population of creatures) can change into another kind.

"Kind" isn't a real thing (per biology). Nor has anyone ever demonstrated the existence of any biological barriers related to such a thing.

 

[Kenny'sID]

The only problem here, is you being scientifically illiterate.

No I'm not.

There's, the empty response your empty claim that showed no merit whatsoever. Just words that get us nowhere.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Actually I do understand Darwin’s ideas as I’ve got a mainstream biology degree. Evolution isn’t Abiogenesis, which is the origin of life from chemicals. Evolution explains how life changes over time due to mutations, an imperfect DNA repair mechanism; and a slowly, continually changing environment due to plate tectonics. A static lifeform would just go extinct. The opposite of evolution is extinction not creationism.

And my actual question?

 

[Speedwell]

actually you are the one who have no idea since you cant prove that one kind of creature (population of creatures) can change into another kind.

What's a "kind?" In evolution, all that has to happen is the repeated branching of speciation.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Who is asking for faith in anything?

Who is asking for faith in anything?

Scientific theories aren't about faith, they are about understanding. It's purely about knowledge acquisition, nothing else.

then remove the word faith form the comment, and comment on what's left. Faith had little to do with my point.

 

[xianghua]

And you are right. A single out-of-order fossil would probably be regarded as an anomaly rather than a wholesale falsification of the entire theory of evolution.

ok but that was brightmoon claim so i will wait to see what she think.

To truly falsify our understanding of historical evolution of species, what we'd really expect to find is a whole lot of fossils completely mixed up.

actually even if it was true evolution has no problem with such a thing. in this case we can claim that most species evolved quickly. its very similar to what we find with the cambrian explosion. and this is why they call it "explosion".

 

[pitabread]

actually even if it was true evolution has no problem with such a thing. in this case we can claim that most species evolved quickly.

If we found all species (past and present) mixed up with no apparent order or evolutionary patterns going back to the earliest geological ages, then yes, our understanding of the history of life on Earth would need to be completely re-written.

its very similar to what we find with the cambrian explosion. and this is why they call it "explosion".

Given the existence of pre-Cambrian precursors, there is a lot of debate to how much of an "explosion" really occurred in the Cambrian. Suffice to say, I wouldn't use that as an argument since it's not remotely the same thing to what I am talking about.

 

[inquiring mind]

"Kind" isn't a real thing (per biology). Nor has anyone ever demonstrated the existence of any biological barriers related to such a thing.

It’s real per God’s Word in the Genesis account. “After his/their kind” is used several times.