To falsify ID, all an evolutionist has to do is show a realistic probability that the prebiotic soup could by chance form life. This hasn't happened yet. Or they could show that irreducible complexity can be reduced. They haven't. Or that the universe isn't fine tuned for life. They haven't--unless you believe in multiple universes. Oh, that's really verifiable. There are arguments against each of the points I raise, but until there is consensus, the debate needs to go on. If neither side can point to irrefutable evidence, then neither is more than a theory, and the only thing to do is consider the preponderance of the evidence, seek more evidence, and hone the argument. Unfortunately, opponents of ID most often would prefer name calling. If you have evidence to refer me to, I'd be happy to explore it. Until then, neither evolution or ID are above debate.
That wouln't falsify ID, coz "The Designer" could still have done it.
To falsify ID, the ID advocates have to come up with the concept of a piece of evdence that MUST be observed for ID to have occurred, or something that cannot possibly exist if ID was responsible (and finding of which would thus falsify ID)
To falsify ID, all an evolutionist has to do is show a realistic probability that the prebiotic soup could by chance form life.
Strawman. Organic chemistry isn't random. There are no long chain oxygen molecules.
Or they could show that irreducible complexity can be reduced.
No one has yet calculated the "irreducible complexity" of anything. At this point there is still no such thing as "irreducible complexity". How is something that doesn't exist, reduced?
Or that the universe isn't fine tuned for life.
Strawman. Earth is the only place life has been found so far. It's obvious that life is a rare and precious thing and doesn't appear everywhere in the universe.
There are arguments against each of the points I raise, but until there is consensus, the debate needs to go on.
There has never been consensus on anything in the human experience. This is a ridiculous requirement for any kind of knwledge, much less science.
Until then, neither evolution or ID are above debate.
Still waiting for ID to explain anything. It has yet to explain the designer, the fossil record, or calcualte irreducible complexity for anything.
While evolutionary biologists continue to produce fascinating new information, ID is still looking for an idea. There's nothing to debate.