You noticed that too, huh? And repeating dismissive lines like, "Go prove (the unprovable)."
Each proposition holds it's own burden of proof, and in order to be a scientifically valid proposition it must be falsifiable.
Re-read TRH's last post.
Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye
So let him publish a paper disproving evolution in a proper biology journal and see if the field agrees with him. That's how it's done.
There are many ways to falsify evolution, TRH is suggesting this guy take up the challenge and publish his findings in a proper peer review journal. By proper journal, he means a top scientific biological journal, not "The Journal for Creationist Research".
He doesn’t have findings. He isn’t claiming a theory as to how it happened. He isn’t even claiming to be a creationist. He is just telling them that no one has ever explained an adequate theory at the molecular level as to how all this is supposed to work. It’s all mumbo jumbo hand waiving “takes a lot of time” junk. IF YOU ACTUALLY LISTEN TO HIM, he quite explicitly says that as a scientist, he is open to any actual explanation that stands the rest of science, but so far at the level he knows and where it all has to begin, it’s all junk.
He lightly mocks biologists as well and says that they view the whole process from “30,000 feet” without understanding what must happen at the molecular level. He also says that the evidence is overwhelming for micro evolution but no one has gotten there for macro evolution yet as far as anything he has seen.
He isn’t an origin of life researcher. He isn’t a biologist. He is just some who knows the science necessary better than anyone and understands that all the current explanations are junk sold as science to a gullible public.
