In my last blog I shown that in every area of investigation there is an finite amount of possible answers, of which none were counted as falsification for evolution. So in an area of investigation with four possibilities, all four would be argued to be evolution.
But it's worse than that for evolution-theory. If that makes it weak in that it can't be falsified, then the things you have to believe enabled macro-evolution make it even weaker.
In every sense of the word abiogenesis is science-fiction. The only science we see here is the law of biogenesis, (life comes from life).
But it's worse than that for evolution because you also have to believe in a non-existent molten-blob of an earth in the past when all of the fine-tuned parameters of the earth are clearly designed to be how they are. So you must believe in a fictional primordial earth which is in no way science, then a fictional primordial swamp then a fiction abiogenesis then a fictional abiogenesised universal ancestor.
There is absolutely NO WAY WHATSOEVER that any of these things come close to being factual, and the onus of proof implies science-fiction therefore evolution must also be science fiction since it depends on these fictional elements.
No comments:
Post a Comment