[tallhappy]

How is evolution falsifiable?

Realistically in terms of experiments that can be done or observations made.

It seems Darwin's predictions have been proven wrong, but that only causes the theory to be reassessed.

Gradual change over timne was not seen, so punctuated equilibrium is proposed etc...

I do not think there is anything that could falsify the theory.

Evolution and ID are really paradigms, not theory.

[Condorman]

Wait a minute!! Are you saying that the theory of evolution has changed over time? That the parts of the theory that work are kept, the parts that have been falsified are discarded, and new parts are added to conform the theory to observed evidence?

That can't possibly be science!

[cracker]

I do not think there is anything that could falsify the theory. Evolution and ID are really paradigms, not theory.

Uh, we gave you plenty of examples that could falsify the theory. If the theory has to modified in the face of new information, well, that's SCIENCE. Since all of our scientific knowledge is subject to revision upon further discovery, would you suggest that all science is bunk?

IF you've got examples of how ID is falsifiable, or of predictions made by ID, I'd like to know. Heck,if you've even got a nice statement of ID, I'd like to hear it. But don't just assert that evolution and ID are equivalent - they aren't, not by miles.

Evolution is not perfect, but it is the best explanation for the observed evidence. Nothing is as good or better. If you want to disprove it, show that natural selection does not occur, or that it is insufficient to explain the observed evidence, etc. And then offer a superior scientific alternative.