"Scrutinizing Our Own Hypotheses"- Earth to Joshua Swamidass

-
Scrutinizing our own hypotheses is title post over on Peaceful Science. Joshua Swamidass is upset with ID because we haven't done a good enough job, in his mind, of trying to falsify our claims.

Earth to Joshua Swamidass- For IDists to falsify our claims we would be doing the exact work evolutionists should be doing to support their claims- none of which they are trying to falsify for the mere fact they are still trying to find ways to test them.

The following exchange is very telling also:

The onus is on those who are convinced that life came into existence without any guidance or planning, due to chance combinations of atoms and molecules plus later chemical developments, to give a credible account of how it could have happened.

 Joshua responds with:

That is the part that is not how science works.

WRONG! Those making the claims have to not only have a methodology to test those claims but to have actually tested them. Science requires testability. From UC Berkeley:

Ultimately, scientific ideas must not only be testable, but must actually be tested — preferably with many different lines of evidence by many different people. This characteristic is at the heart of all science.

ID has that, Joshua.

Swamidass lays a doozy:

I would be really impressed of IDists tried to falsify their theory, but I have yet to see this.

 What. The. Fuck? Dr. Behe has done exactly that- he has looked high and low for anything that would show blind and mindless processes could produce any bacterial flagellum. That is why he wrote the first book. He ran out of ways to do what you are suggesting.

Even after the book was published there have only been lame attempts to refute its claims.

Peaceful Science is run by scientifically illiterate and willfully ignorant ass-hats.

ETA Michael Behe:

If I conducted such an experiment and no flagellum were evolved, what Darwinist would believe me? What Darwinist would take that as evidence for my claims that Darwinism is wrong and ID is right? As I testified to the Court, Kenneth Miller claimed there was experimental evidence showing that complex biochemical systems could evolve by random mutation and natural selection, and he pointed to the work of Barry Hall on the lac operon. I explained in great detail to the Court why Miller was exaggerating, was incorrect, and made claims that Barry Hall himself never did. However, no Darwinist I am aware of subsequently took Hall’s experiments as evidence against Darwinism. Neither did the Court mention it in its opinion.

The flagellum experiment the Court described above is one that, if successful, would strongly affirm Darwinian claims, and so should have been attempted long ago by one or more of the many, many adherents of Darwinism in the scientific community. That none of them has tried such an experiment, and that similar experiments that were tried on other molecular systems have failed, should count heavily against their theory.

Swamidass is clueless and apparently proud of it.