Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Anarchydream on May 10, 2009 at 6:46am

http://sntjohnny.com/smf/index.php?topic=1574.0"
This link takes you to arguement where falsifiablity of evolution is the topic.
It is written from the POV of the creationist and rebutted by a normal person.
It's easy to see that this statement is just circular logic that ID'sts use to confuse the mentally challenged. But read it for yourself and decide.

Permalink Reply by George on May 27, 2009 at 3:54am

For some reason clicking on your link brought me back to this page.

The correct link is: Topic: Intelligent Design, Evolution, and Falsifiability.

Permalink Reply by Karl on May 10, 2009 at 7:36am

Surely it is falsifiable because all you have to do is find an animal with 'made by God' written on its bones and bob's your uncle.

Permalink Reply by Susan Stanko on May 10, 2009 at 10:19am

You could then point out how creationism aka ID, is not falsifiable.

Permalink Reply by Jonathan Johnson on May 10, 2009 at 10:52am

Exactly. At some point we'll get down to the the argument about how quarks and leptons are intelligently designed.

Permalink Reply by Angie Jackson on May 26, 2009 at 1:10pm

Yes, but that lends credence to their "they are both equal, so let's teach them all and let the kids decide" argument.

Permalink Reply by Sebastian Portelli on May 10, 2009 at 12:33pm

You people are great, thanks for the replies. I'm currently making a youtube vid as a response to a creationist making this argument. I'll post it here too when I'm done.

Now I've preparing to reply to a section of quotes, and we all know how honest creationists are when it comes to quotes (he says sarcastically).

First up is a quote from C. H. Waddington, and goes as follows:

"The theory of evolution is unfalsifiable, if an animal evolves one way, biologists have a perfectly good explanation; but if it evolves some other way, they have an equally good explanation... . The theory is not a predictive theory as to what must happen."

I've tried using google and I've only managed to find a handful of creation websites that quote this but never a source. Can anyone clarify?

Permalink Reply by Polymath on May 10, 2009 at 8:05pm

First of all, a theory doesn't have to be predictive in every particular to be falsifiable. For example, quantum mechanics cannot make a prediction of exactly when a radioactive nucleus will decay or, often, which decay route it will take. There are probabilistic falsifiable theories.

That said, one strong prediction of evolutionary biology is the existence of multiple nested hierarchies. For example, suppose you do a study of comparative anatomy and build a tree representing the similarities based on anatomical structure. Now do a study of your favorite protein, say cytochrome C and build a tree based on similarities in the structure of this protein in different species. Then do the same with your second favorite protein. ALL of these trees should be compatible if they are caused by evolution of ancestors. if they were not (a very likely thing a priori), evolution would be falsified. Well, of course, the different trees *are* compatible.

Next, look at retroviral inserts. These are caused when certain viruses insert their DNA into the germ line of an animal. This DNA then gets passed to the animals progeny. A prediction of evolution is that animals with more recent common ancestors will have more of these inserts in common. Furthermore, the tree obtained by the commonalities should match the trees obtained in the last paragraph. Again, if this turned out not to be the case, it would show that common ancestry was untenable. Once again, the prediction holds up in the real world.

Next, and closer to home, humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes for a total of 46 while chimpanzees have 24 pairs for a total of 48. This seems like an unlikely thing under evolution. So, what must have happened is that two of the chimpanzee ancestral chromosomes fused to produce the humans ones (or one split to produce the chimp's). If this did not turn out to be the case, the common recent ancestry of humans and chimps would be falsified. Now, we can tell when chromosomes have been fused because of structures called teleomeres, which usually are located at the *end* of the chromosomes. In human chromosome 2, however, there are teleomeres in the *middle* of the chromosome. Furthermore, if you split that chromosome at that internal teleomere, the two pieces exactly match up with two of the chimp chromosomes. Once again, a very specific prediction based on common ancestry that could have shown evolution of humans to be wrong, yert it passed.

Permalink Reply by Mike Hein on May 12, 2009 at 12:17am

Polymath: I don't say this to a lot of people but you are a smart mf'er. Nicely put and I don't think a quality answer could be phrased more concisely. Cheers to you.

Permalink Reply by Dr. Terence Meaden on May 12, 2009 at 1:25am

Polymath, you have made a very fine contribution to this debate involving matters of falsification testing. The chromosome/teleomere situation for humans and chimpanzees is a splendidly apt example of falsifiability recognition.

Permalink Reply by mxyzptlk on May 18, 2009 at 6:14pm

heh heh heh... zing!

Permalink Reply by Rosemary LYNDALL WEMM on May 26, 2009 at 1:03pm

Thanks for explaining this so clearly. The only bit I got lost on was the protein bits. What is "cytochrome C"?

The retrovirus and chromosome fusion passages are top notch summaries of info I have only recently come across. Bravo!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page