"The scientific method relies upon several phases. Firstly observations are taken of the phenomena under study, secondly an hypothesis is established which fits the phenomena observed, the hypothesis must have three distinct characteristics aside from its conformance to observation. It must be verifiable or repeatable, in other words if the same examination is made by others they must agree that the hypothesis does fit the observations" (EVO-FIRE-01: Introduction)
I totally agree! Unfortunately evolution does NOT fit any of the above specifications. You can NOT observe the mutation of one animal into another...it has never happened. Yes mutations occur but they have NEVER changed an animal to another kind of animal as far as human science and recolection recall.
Next problem, you nor anyone else has ever repeated evolution from one animal kind to another, yes they have caused mutations, but it is debatable whether or not mutations ever cause evolution, and thus can NOT be considered rock solid scientific fact.
With these points in mind, is it necessary to say that evolution is not and never will be falsifiable, as it already fails to meet two of the key phases of science?
"All of these are under potentially constant attack and there are two ways in which any hypothesis may be removed from the understood science. An observation may be made which does not fit the hypothesis forcing it to be modified. A new experiment may be devised which allows the hypothesis to be proven untrue, in effect this falsifies the hypothesis." (EVO-FIRE-01: Introduction)
Yes, these have occured many times and thus evolution has evolved itself largely from the original theory by Charles Darwin. In fact, many evolutionists disagree with each other, and many admit if there WAS evolution it was a God that started it.
"This is also known as microevolution" (EVO-FIRE-01: The Origin Of The Species; Evolution)
Well yes, we all agree that adaptations and mutations occur, but have they EVER in human history formed another kind of living being? NO!
"In naive terms this could mean an inability to interbreed but in practice it could be related to divergent behaviour or even modified anatomy." (EVO-FIRE-01: The Origin Of The Species; Speciation
LOL listen my friend, if a donkey and a horse breed it creates a mule. Now, according to our current system of taxonomy (classification) this would seem to pose a new species. HOWEVER, who's to say this is an accurate system? Why don't we just match up animals by KINDS and see if there's ever been much mutation? Examples: fossils of wolves from (supposedly) 95000 years ago are strikingly similar as those today.
"The diversity of life we see around us implies either directed control over the appearance of species (in either the short or long term) or a long term process consisting of some form of selection." (EVO-FIRE-01: The Origin Of The Species; Diversity
You sound like the evolutionist I mentioned earlier! I totally agree. If there IS evolution it is directly controlled by something...someone (shall I need say WHO?)
"Life on Earth is roughly 3.5 billion years old" (EVO-FIRE-01: How Evolution Works; Biochemistry
Here's a way too common thing. Theory stated as fact in the realms of science. How do we know the life on earth is that old? We can't accurately know as according to scientific method it can not be observed, reproduced, or proven true or not true.
"Life is actually defined by its proteins. Every living thing relies upon them to do the actual work of a cell" (EVO-FIRE-01: How Evolution Works; Biochemistry
Ah ha, and this leads me to the next question. If NOT by ordained design, how did our heart and lungs and blood line and brain and all of that just fall into place EVEN by chance over billions of years. Supposedly we have been around 50,000+ years, why hasn't a single finger or ANYTHING evolved in that time? Surely if an entire human body can evolve in 3.5 billion a limb could in a few thousand right? Hasn't happened.
"Higher organisms, particularly animals, are extremely complex. Progressively specialised organs have developed to take care of functions for the entire body, not merely for their own cells. " (EVO-FIRE-01: How Evolution Works; Physiology
Look, I might be able to buy that a human could evolve over billions, but all the billions of differant kinds of animals as well? Get real! Way too many cells would have to evolve. Even Big Bang could not possibly capacitate them all.
"In all animals there are vestigial structures of one form or another. In humans, for example, there are at least four complete organs with no function. The appendix, ulula, tonsils and coccyx are all redundant" (EVO-FIRE-01: How Evolution Works; Vestigial Organs and Processes
Actually if you read the latest official reports they are finding that the appendix and tonsils are both NOT vestigial, they are quite required for something or other (I forget which, I'm not just copying and pasting the work of someone else, I'm doing my own :-)
You see, what organs can be considered vestigial? Ones we can survive without? Well, how about a loss of genetals, or one kidney or one lung, etc. Why haven't they just gone away as evolution would have you believe? We can certainly survive without them, yet they are here and have been since even evolutionary time began!
"From the beginning of serious studies this issue has caused controversy. In fact the currently accepted figure didn't become so until this century" (EVO-FIRE-01: The Physical Canvas; The Age Of The Earth
Actually it's not accepted by me or many others because only theory has presented this "currently accepted figure", not anything rock solid. What if your figures are off? What's to say an arctic ice cap can't develop at twice the rate you think it is and thus make the earth 1.2 million years old? Hmmmm?
"The methods of dating finds are quite varied. In practice the finds can be dated by placing them in a construct called the geologic column" (EVO-FIRE-01: The Physical Canvas; Dating
Well yes, but there have been many changes to the geologic column such as meteor impacts, moisture, etc. that could definately change the appearance and throw your dating methods off by a long shot. PLUS, if you stick a living bull's horns in a C14 dating machine and see what happens it says the living bull is millions of years old. A similar problem occured 10 years ago as Joseph Storthon of Portland Oregon found a mysterious object while on a dig, using your own fossil methods he figured it was at least millions of years old. Happened to be a cow cud from 2 years earlier. Oops, another mistake in our methods people! I hate to break the ice, but these methods consistantly do NOT work.
"Fossilisation takes a varied amount of time depending on conditions. Some classes of object can become fossilised in as little as five to ten thousand years others can take at least an order of magnitude longer. Fortunately calcification is a much steadier process. Calcification starts as soon as fossilisation is fully underway but it doesn't complete for at least 250 million years. This gives us an opportunity to make use of this feature in assisting with dating." (EVO-FIRE-01: The Physical Canvas; Fossilisation
In Moscow Russia they have fossilized Mamoths that have greenery in there mouths (such as grass, etc.). Why did this occur if it took millions of years to fossilize? Doesn't this somewhat support the theory of an almost instant death? How about a huge wave nailed them all at once from Noah's flood and immediately fossilized them?
"The evolutionary pathways are complex but there are a few very clear examples which allow easy relationship between fossils found in the same stratum. The classic example is the flowering plant" (EVO-FIRE-01: Stages In Evolution; Flowering Plants
Let's not forget the mamoth number ;-) Enclosed in one of their mouths was apparently some sort of common FLOWER. If mamoth's died out before the flowers why are they eating them? Perhaps they had a mid-death snack.
"While flowering plants may be the most famous example of taxonomic change across the record there are others. To describe them would take too long but for a few examples look at the sudden explosion of land-dwelling amphibians, the rapid expansion of mammals, the localisation of marsupials, the supremacy of placental mammals and the rapid use of the avian frame to exploit flightless niches." (EVO-FIRE-01: Stages In Evolution; Taxonomy
Doesn't this kinda' make it sound like it all happened at once just like the creationist theory suggests?
"Despite the repeated attacks on evolution it has remained unassailable thus far. The entire scientific body accepts evolution as fact just as they accept that the sun is a star and black objects don't reflect light. This is impossible unless the evidence has failed to prove any irreconcilable problems with the theory and there is significant supporting evidence." (EVO-FIRE-01: Science and Scientists; Uniformity of Opinion
Two blind men can't prove they can see. :-)
Evidence Which Demands a Verdict by J. McDowell Several reports by Dr. John Morris of Institute for Creation Research