Replies

No, the direction of the change in his position is explicit. His earlier position was that while it was a very successful and useful metaphysical research program, natural selection was not testable and probably a tautology. He says he based that on a misreading of the popular writings of a few well known evolutionists. He says that he himself was a culprit in spreading this misrepresentation. You refuse to acknowledge what Popper plainly said. Again, you are either illiterate or a practiced *Liar for the Lord*. Either way you have shown yourself time and time again to be beneath rational discussion.

"Nevertheless, I have changed my mind about the testability and logical status of the theory of natural selection; and I am glad to have an opportunity to make a recantation. My recantation may, I hope, contribute a little to the understanding of the status of natural selection."

He says,

"However, Darwin's own most important contribution to the theory of evolution, his theory of natural selection, is difficult to test. There are some tests, even some experimental tests; and in some cases, such as the famous phenomenom known as "industrial melanism", we can observe natural selection happening under our very eyes, as it were. Nevertheless, really severe tests of the theory of natural selection are hard to come by, much more so than tests of otherwise comparable theories in physics or chemistry.

The fact that the theory of natural selection is difficult to test has led some people, anti-Darwinists and even some great Darwinists, to claim that it is a tautology. "

He rejected this after careful attention to what the theory of evolution said. He says that it can be tested, although the tests are very difficult. Fair enough, nobody said it was easy. You however, because you desperately need to cling to the creationist lie that Popper never changed his mind about the logical nature of Natural Selection, refuse to accept what is plainly laid out for you in English.

You however, because you desperately need to cling to the creationist lie that Popper never changed his mind about the logical nature of Natural Selection, refuse to accept what is plainly laid out for you in English.

If you read my posts you would see that I have acknowleged it is fully within Popper's capacity and prerogative to change his mind. Frankly I don't care which direction. This quote does not make it clear. I know how to read. It is not "plainly laid out." I further said that this would be typical of a philosophy that fails to acknowledge, let alone state, it's presuppositions.

Meanwhile you should understand that I hardly consider Karl Popper to be the sole spokesman for what does, or does not, constitute science. To the extent he embraces an "amoeba to man" history of the biosphere (if, in fact he even does) he is outside the bounds of science in the strict sense anyway, whether he realizes it or not.