Replies

That part is what makes it falsifiable.

Oh, it's falsifiable, but it's not testable unless you can do what I say and show THERE IS NO NATURALISTIC UNGUIDED SCENARIO. Good luck on supporting your claim of that negative.

As you make clear, any laboratory demonstration in less than a human lifetime of what could have happened in truly unguided fashion over several hundred million years will be "proof of design" as you intend to spin it.

Your whole proposal is a stupid Catch-22 game which should fool only the people dumb enough to prefer superstition in the first place.

"but it's not testable unless you can do what I say and show THERE IS NO NATURALISTIC UNGUIDED SCENARIO"

Only the statement as a whole is both testable and falsifiable. It is EXACTLY how other scientific statements are evaluated.

"any laboratory demonstration... will be 'proof of design' as you intend to spin it."

It would be supporting evidence, rather than "proof of design". It will always to be subject to being falsified.

If this statement is so fundamentally flawed, it should be possible to show the differences between it and some other scientific hypothesis.

Otherwise, your standard of demarcation is meaningless because it applies when you want it to and does not at your whim.

Perhaps evolutionary theory is falsifiable in a certain sense, but not in the same way you are demanding of my hypothesis. By the requirement you just made, evolution must show there never has been a GUIDED SCENARIO. You cannot falsify it in that way. It is unreasonable to demand this of my hypothesis.