Thread: Panspermia
View Single Post
  #21  
Old 11-30-2005, 05:00 PM
Sifmole Sifmole is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 0
Default Falsifiability of ET

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

A good example of a scientific theory that is open to investigation and validation. In contrast to God made us a we are 5000 years ago rot


[/ QUOTE ]

Panspermia is science and ID isn't. Um, ok.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I may steer this in a different direction, is ID falsifiable?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is Evolutionary Theory falsifiable? This is the main problem with these discussions. Vehement ET believers are quite often vehement christians-are-idiots believers as well; and the ET vs ID discussion becomes nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt for Atheists and Christians to attack each other's core beliefs.

Can one of the vehement ET people explain why ET gets lets go on the following points:
1) There is zero PROOF of any occurance of evolution ( lots of pieced together observations and remains around which a story has been built yet -- but no hard PROOF )

2) That ET would seem to predict ongoing unaided evolution, which has not been observed ( natural selection != evolution ), yet all the ET has to say is "the time frame is too short" -- this avoids falsiability.

3) ET so far appears untestable.

Please responses, other than " you fool you are wrong " are desired, such as actual references to cases testing the falsifiability of ET would be appreciated.

Obviously ID fails on all these counts which is why ETs ridicule it.
Reply With Quote