Failure to state an observation that would falsify ID noted.
Conclusion that ID does not yet qualify to be a scientific theory drawn.
Failure to state an observation that would falsify ID noted.
Here are a few that FR Member Ahban provided clear back in 2001, along with some brief commentary. Let me know what you think.
1) New families of animals (for tech. reasons, plants and microbes don't count)arise either spontaneously or through breeding. A net gain in info that causes complex new features to arise would do the job, even if it was not a new family. Maybe some wasp species would develop the complicated mating structures of the dragonfly for example.
If a major change like that is observed occurring, even if only once in four centuries, it is enough to show that evolution is a sufficient explanation for what we observe to at least the FAMILY level. This does not mean ID is UTTERLY falsified, but it would strongly tip the scales. Maybe we would retreat to the CLASS or even PHYLUM levels. Still, that would be a big retreat.
It is important to note that many scientists tried to do just that with fruit fly experiments. They bombarded the critters with radiation hoping to observe just such an event. Not only did such attempts end in failure, but they discovered that the same mutations kept occurring. It seems that there are only so many ways to mutate a fruit fly and come up with a viable creature. That argues against method #2, but here goes...
2) ID could be falsified if they could genetically or mathematically show that every phylum of critter is connected to every other phylum by a series of mutations that can produce a viable creature. They would also have to show that the number of mutations required could reasonably occurred in the time allowed.
ID argues that at some level (families, classes, species, whatever) creatures live one genetically isolated "islands". There is great variation on each island, but the distance between islands is too great to cross- at least in the 543 million years we have to work with. If one could show that the gaps are not that great, that genetically creatures have viable mutation paths between families and even phylums, then ID is falsified.
3)Most ID could be falsified to some extent (the same extent as evolution) if the predictions made by the theory are contradicted by new discoveries in the fossil record.
If the fossil record were to show new families and classes, and orders showing up AFTER man (the real man, the one with art, religion, and culture) appears, then this major branch of ID would be largely falsified. Instead, we see that after the advent of man, new critters quit showing up.
-----------
If you want the link to the thread where this came from, let me know. I can't find it now, but can when I have more time.
FRegards, MM