RE: Literal and Not Literal
September 10, 2019 at 9:47 am
(This post was last modified: September 10, 2019 at 9:49 am by Mister Agenda.)
quote='John 6IX Breezy' pid='1931716' dateline='1568121505']
How do you falsify a theory that predicts every possible outcome for the relationship between lions, tigers, and jaguars? [/quote]
Every possible outcome if the theory of evolution is correct. Outcomes that don't depend on common descent aren't included. If one occurs, you've falsified at least part of evolution. The theory will have to be revised to account for the new information, or possibly scrapped if the evidence is too contradictory, for example if it were to turn out that lemurs are more closely related genetically to bananas than gorillas.
Evolution is defining the 'possibility space', if you accept that those are the only possibilities, you're accepting at least one of the premises of evolution.
How do you falsify a theory that predicts every possible outcome for the relationship between lions, tigers, and jaguars? [/quote]
Every possible outcome if the theory of evolution is correct. Outcomes that don't depend on common descent aren't included. If one occurs, you've falsified at least part of evolution. The theory will have to be revised to account for the new information, or possibly scrapped if the evidence is too contradictory, for example if it were to turn out that lemurs are more closely related genetically to bananas than gorillas.
Evolution is defining the 'possibility space', if you accept that those are the only possibilities, you're accepting at least one of the premises of evolution.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
