Salient question, yes.
I don't know the answer.
The same applies to evolution as well. Is it falsifiable?
I am not sure how it is. What observation or experiment could be done to disporve evolution?
Of course. E.g. by discovering in one place fossils of organisms that should not have been there according to evolution's predictions.
Find a chimera. (You know, the old "the platypus disproves evolution" argument.)
Find fossil strata with the layers "out of order" with respect to orderings elsewhere. (You know, the old "human and dinosaur tracks together disprove evolution" argument.)
Discover and demonstrate a method of natural speciation that does not depend upon natural selection.
Off the top of my head? If I were to repeat Mendel's sweet pea experiments and grow a family of aardvarks.
1. An examination of DNA might reveal that gibbons share more in common with fir trees than fruit bats. That would be quite a problem... OR:
2. Fossils of dinosaurs in Quaternary sediments, with no other explanation for their arrival.
3. Perfectly preserved human remains dated to 1.2 billion years ago.
Any of those, or a hundred million variations on them, would pose a serious hurdle for evolution.
1: The sudden (miraculous) appearance of a new creature in significant numbers over a wide territory. this experiment would have to be conducted by God, but it would convince me and a lot of other people.
More seriously, what is it about evolution that you don't believe happens? Variation? Selection? I once saw an article in the magazine "The Plain truth" that denied mutation exists. It was full of technical jargon and written by PHDs.
Or do you simply deny that variation can result in "increased information" -- sort of like denying that quantum tunneling exists -- if it can't happen logically, it can't happen.