It means that if you wish to make something scientifically valid/sound... you must be able to show it could be false. since we can't show the mechanism for which supposed evolution takes place (no scientist has yet to show it nor repeat it ... please don't link any bacteria or e-coli studies... all that proves is you get more bacteria... no new species)
- What does falsifiable mean?
- The Pattern of Differences in Cytochrome-C
the pattern of differences in Cytochrome C shows just how different humans are from fish ( a said ancestor of you and i by evo-devos)
This was already covered extensively and proven that the eye did not form in the darwinian blind/random step by step process.... rather the evidence shows that the eye independently showed up in dozens of different species at around the same time..all in rapid fashion.... well against anything that Pixie states should of happened if one is to believe in textbook evolution... no wonder so many scientists are bailing from it.
- The Evolution of Eyes
again already covered and shown that not all species have this same defect.. evolution fails to show how vit-C pseudogene exists in the first place...heck it fails to explain any gene.
- The Vitamin C Pseudogene
Oddly you seem to define evidence in a vastly different way that others do... in fact there was an attempt to show transitional fossils as an abundance of evidence ...each one was shot down as a dead end species that passed nothing on.(sadly)
- Abundance of Evidence
Not really. it was already proven to you by my research and yours too that dogs actually descended from a wolf/dog like creature that has yet to be discovered. hmmm nice try though seems an agenda can be blinding to facts....please re-read my link for comprehension.
- Dogs are Descended From Wolves
Science uses math extensively ... and relies on proven axioms (something taken as truth)...and as that it is used in multiple and vast fields to help prove theories as valid. Mathematically the Higgs Boson was predicted decades ago... and finally the math held true once it was discovered/detected. I like how you try to twist the original context that 'science is not proven' ... too funny and to obvious to call out.
- A Proof in Maths Does Not Prove Science
Millions and Trillions.... I hope that makes as much sense as your question.... but if not .. my answer seems by far more powerful in order of magnitudes above yours.
- Hundreds and Thousands
so far the answers seem to come pretty easily...
- Questions Creationism Cannot Answer
? ? not even what ? maybe see the earlier resonse
- Not Even Cytochrome-c
“but test everything; hold fast what is good”
[1 Thessalonians 5:21 (ESV)]