[OneWingedShark]

>>It’s one of the defining elements... the theory could be revised, yes, but would disprove the theory as-is.
>
>Then there will still be a revised theory to deal with. If your objective is to disprove speciation by evolution, this is not going to accomplish that.

Not quite; the ‘falsification’ attribute of Darwin’s evolution, as he stated it, was the presence of some attribute which could not be explained by (basically) stepwise refinement: sexuality is such an attribute: to be valid a reproduction method has to be working, but in order to be working it has to be fully-formed, so sexual-reproduction is a counterproof. (Specification is a specific sub-component, by disproving random-mutation/natural-selection as the vehicle of change the whole theory crumbles.)

[tacticalogic]

Not quite; the ‘falsification’ attribute of Darwin’s evolution, as he stated it, was the presence of some attribute which could not be explained by (basically) stepwise refinement: sexuality is such an attribute: to be valid a reproduction method has to be working, but in order to be working it has to be fully-formed, so sexual-reproduction is a counterproof.

Scientists have found microbes that can reproduce both sexually and asexually.