Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadsword2004
Would have to disagree there. There are thousands of fossils that have been found to verify macroevolution.
|
Where is the smooth continuum of fossils showing the link between:
-invertebrates and vertebrates?
-fish and amphibians?
-amphibians and reptiles?
-reptiles and birds?
-among insects?
It isn't there.
There are only artists' renditions and other imaginations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadsword2004
IMO, I do not know if the consequent as regards evolution is falsifiable.
|
That was kinda my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadsword2004
The problem here is if one believes there is a scientific alternative to evolution. I do not personally see the alternative argued (i.e. intelligent design) as being a scientific alternative. If there are scientific alternatives, then sure, finding fossils does not mean evolution is true, but what is the scientific alternative?
|
If evolution is true, then all of the alternatives are false.
There are no alternatives (alternatives are false), therefore evolution is true.
A implies B.
B, therefore A.
Affirming the consequent.
When evolution gets pinned down, the subject always changes to alternatives.