The World’s Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Evolution is not a scientific theory because it is not falsifiable.

How do I respond to that?

Tags: debate, evolution, science, theory

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Polymath on May 12, 2009 at 2:37pm

I'd also like to point out that these are *far* from being the only tests of evolution. The example of Tiktaalik is a very interesting one. Here, the scientists predicted the existence of this species and where it should be possible to find it. They went there (northern Canada) and found what they had predicted!

Permalink Reply by Rick Marsteller on May 12, 2009 at 5:29pm

Not sure if anyone else already covered this bit...Evolution is falsifiable: Darwin himself described several points that would automatically rule it out. Off the top of my head: A young Earth would mean not enough time for evolution to work and, possibly the biggest one; if ever even a single fossil of a modern animal was found in ancient rock strata, it would undermine the whole idea. These things have simply never been found and, in fact, everything that ever has been found lends even more support to the original idea while refining our understanding of the whole. There is a huge difference between a theory being falsifiable and some bible banger getting frustrated because they can't figure out how to prove it wrong.

Permalink Reply by Mel on May 12, 2009 at 6:18pm

There is a line of pseudo-evidence on that one. Does anyone remember the human-footprints-in-T-rex-rocks? :D I actually had that one called on me once, and I could only reply that I didn't know anything about it and therefore couldn't possibly comment. :D

Permalink Reply by Rene Benthien on May 12, 2009 at 11:39pm

sorry what? human footprints with T-rex?

Permalink Reply by Mel on May 12, 2009 at 11:59pm

It's false, but for a while there was "evidence" floating around that there were human footprints in the same chunk of rock as velociraptor prints. And suppossedly the same age.
I'm not sure if a real scientist ever got their hands on it in order to debunk it, but theres some stuff online
http://www.paleo.cc/paluxy/paluxy.htm
http://jeremytheskeptic.blogspot.com/2008/07/humandinosaur-fossil-f...

Permalink Reply by Sebastian Portelli on May 13, 2009 at 2:33am

If only I had a dollar for every time that came up in a debate. I ask if such evidence was peer-reviewed but I never got a straight answer.

Permalink Reply by Jim DePaulo on May 19, 2009 at 8:55am

The tracks you are referring to I believe were the ones in Texas. It seems that a local prankster had carved the "human" footprints in the rock.

Permalink Reply by Mel on May 26, 2009 at 4:23pm

I had always figured that there was a decent explanation for it, but without having the energy to go and find out a bit more about it, I couldn't say what it was.

Permalink Reply by Manny Espinola on June 16, 2009 at 2:46pm

It was the Jurrassic equivalent of the Piltdown Man hoax---two incongrous epochs meticulously fitted together like jigzaw pieces to confound the orthodoxy. On the otherhand, orthodoxies ought to get tested periodically to check if they're currently worth their salt.

Permalink Reply by Orson_Zedd on May 15, 2009 at 9:25pm

Yes it is? Here's what you need to do to falsify evolution.

Show where two cousin species, say humans and Chimpanzees, show no genetic similarities. If the genes on both were completely different, or organized differently. Basically your hypothesis here would be, "There are genetic markings that are the same in humans and chimpanzees." This, we can show, to be true.

Permalink Reply by Jim DePaulo on May 19, 2009 at 9:03am

The hypothesis would more likely be stated, "Genetic markings that are the same in human and chimpanzee's genomes are due to chance alone. The Null Hypothesis
(nit-picky)

Permalink Reply by quietude on May 26, 2009 at 9:06am