So creationism has been disproved? Falsified? Please provide data which shows this.
Another post from more than 6 months ago, but it's responsive to your request:
A provocative question that Junior recently directed to a creationist: "Biblical prophesies notwithstanding, what biological predictions does creationism make?" The creationist didn't respond, but I do, as follows:
I can think of a few creationist predictions. Because -- according to creationism -- all species were specially created at virtually the same time, and did not gradually evolve from earlier forms:
1. There should be no transitional species.I call these The Five Failed Predictions of Creationism.2. There are most certainly no pre-human (but still humanoid) species.
3. There should be no evidence, whether in fossils or DNA, showing the chronological evolution of life.
4. There must surely be at least one species, and probably several, having no genetic similarities with any other life on earth. This isn't a direct prediction, but it's inferred by the concept of special creation. There is no reason at all for each to be so similar to the others in their molecular structure. For example, there's no creationist reason why a lion can eat animals from all over the globe.
5. The fossil record must show all kinds of species (such as dinosaurs and humans) living together at the same time.
In fairness to the creationists, although the first three have already been disproved (for example: #1 -- Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ, #2 -- Human Ancestors, more #2 -- Comparison of all skulls, #3 - - Tree of Life Project ), the last two (#4 and #5) can't yet be considered to be totally failed predictions. All we can do is point out that the predicted evidence has not yet been discovered. Given the lack of actual research being conducted by creationists, it is unlikely to be discovered.
There is no observation which, in principle, *could* falsify creationism or ID - any observation can be 'explained' by saying "that's just the way [the designer] did it". That's one of the reasons they're not considered scientific - they have zero predictive power, as they are consistent with any observation.
A real scientific theory, like evolution, could be disproved by making observations that the theory predicts can't be; see #187 above.