That was the title of an online discussion I recently participated in; the title was actually written by an evolutionist. In a previous blog, I mentioned that a good theory should be falsifiable. This particular evolutionist agreed with me (at first) and even made the following remarks:
I am interested in clarification of terms because our friends on here in a few threads have shown some great misunderstanding of key concepts of a scientific theory and the scientific method.
Evolution IS falsifiable, it is science after all..
One of the requirements of a good scientific theory is falsifiability. [bold in original]
Needless to say, my ears perked up. Typically evolutionists are loathe to recommend a way ToE could be falsified but here was someone who seemed ready to do just that. He went on to say:
How can we falsify evolution you ask?Simple, we define a hypothesis from the question that we will should not find fossils in the strata out of order, and thus there should be no fossilized dogs in the Pre-Cambrian layers.
If we find a fossilized dog there, then evolution is over and we need to rethink the entirety of it and retool it, basically 'back to the drawing board'.
Ugh. It’s not like I’ve never heard that one before. Well I gave him kudos for trying but I reminded him of a quote I read on TalkOrigins (a pro-evolution web site):
“In order to falsify a theory, you need to know what the theory says. Finding an out-of-sequence fossil or an "impossible" animal may not falsify evolution, but it would falsify the particular theories (in this case historical theories) about that group of organisms - for example, if we found a modern rabbit in the Cambrian Era, we would have a massive problem with existing phylogenies. We might even say that if the program of constructing phylogenies based on the theory of common descent were that wrong, there might be a problem with common descent, and abandon that theory. But this, in itself, would be insufficient to falsify the entire set of theories of evolution, although it might be enough to make people think twice about the general set of assumptions on which they are based.” [Bold in original].
So, for the devout evolutionists, even a rabbit (or a dog) in the Cambrian would not be enough to falsify their theory. But I didn't want to let it go that easily. After all, this guy had said it was “easy” to falsify evolution so I asked him or other posters for some other ways we might falsify the theory. Here are some of the suggestions I got. I kid you not - these are actually quotes from real evolutionists (some of who claim to be scientists):
Find a mammal with a plant cell-wall.
you could demonstrate that speciation does not occur;
1. Visit every case study or scientific article of observed evolution in the wild and in the lab. This should keep you busy for quite some time
2. Show that in every case the experimental design was flawed, or the data was wrong, or the analysis was wrong. etc.
This is not like disproving parentage with a DNA test, it's like proving the entire science of Biology is wrong. [bold added]
There you have it folks, if I can find a mammal with plant cell-walls, prove animals don’t speciate, read every technical paper ever written about evolution and prove them all wrong, AND overturn the entire science of biology, maybe I’ll falsify the theory of evolution.
There are only 2 possible explanations for the origin of life and the universe: we are either here as the result of a supernatural Creator or we are here by entirely natural processes. If you disqualify one option a priori, you have no choice but to cling blindly to the second. True believers in evolution aren’t really interested in seeing their theory falsified. Is ToE a scientific theory or not? If so, there should be a clear way to falsify it. But when you ask an evolutionist how, these are the kinds of answers you’re going to get.