“The scientific method.”
What an incredibly structured sentence.
four hundred quatloos that you don’t understand the scientific method.
“The necessity that a hypothesis needs to be proven through testing and observation before it can be accepted as knowledge; something that is known.”
um, no.
We don’t demand that astronomers run a test to create a star. First off, the budget would be staggering and no one wants that in their back yard or anyone’s back yard in the world.
And observation isn’t how we test a hypothesis. A hypothesis is a means of trying to explain the observations already made.
watch a few thousand things in motion and you observe that everything in motion eventually comes to rest and you make that a ‘law.’ But then you discover friction and your law is disproven… Shucks.
“And, hypothesis, that haven't been tested, can't be trusted as knowledge,”
Wrong.
“but are just assumptions, even though they may be good assumptions.”
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
“ Evolution is a falsified theory.”
what falsifies evolutionary theory, then?
Do tell!
“ "Descent with modification from a common ancestor" requires that the common ancestor be able to be confirmed through testing and observation before the theory can be accepted as knowledgeable.”
Not even close.
Have you ever read a science textbook? They tell you a fact and then they explain it with a theory and THEN they tell you how they know that theory is true. They share the observations that were made (and that survived peer review) so that we have knowledge now.
You don’t have to test everything in a lab, and we already covered observations. You’re just wrong.
“Otherwise, the rules of science label it an unconfirmed assumption.”
No, they do not.
“Evolution is falsified by observation.”
Uh uh.
“ The theory requires a common ancestor for all the millions of species on Earth, but not a single common ancestor has been found.”
Actually, we could have any number of ancestors that are common to all life as long as they all shared genetic material.
And, no, we do NOT have to find them, but we just list the reasons we think that this is how things happened. Feel free to actually attack those reasons, not your cartoon version of science.
“There are fossils that are assumed to be descendants of a common ancestor, but you can't validate a theory with an assumption.”
Well, if the theory is that EVERYTHING ALIVE shares (a) common ancestor(s), then, yes, ever fossil is a descendent of common ancestor(s)
“The Big Bang is a model and not a theory.”
Wrong again.
“A model is part of the process of constructing a theory. The theory then must be tested and validated before it can be accepted as knowledge.”
feel free to describe the experiment you would run in order to test the Big Bang Theory.
“It is ignorance of the rules of science to present Evolution, or the big bang, as science.”
Someone is ignorant, yes.