Don't bother with this idiot... he doesn't even understand HOW to prove a scientific theory incorrect
The only way to prove a scientific theory incorrect, is to provide a BETTER theory... that's literally the ONLY way
The new theory must explain all the observed facts of the previous theory, and more... The new theory must provide valid reasoning and testable, falsifiable, hypothesis... you must provide valid science and experimentation which clearly demonstrates to someone knowledgeable on the subject that your new theory fits all the data, and provides better predictions of future events than the previous theory... this is the only way to disprove a theory... you cannot simply claim "Evolution = proven to not be possible in any way we can theorize", without actually providing a better theory to explain the OBSERVED FACTS of evolution, lmfao
This is no different than saying, "The Theory of Gravity is wrong" without providing a better explanation for the OBSERVED FACTS of gravity, i.e. why things are attracted to massive objects, orbits of planets, etc... to disprove a theory, you need to provide a BETTER theory... (technically you provide a hypothesis... it only becomes a theory once it stands up to decades/centuries of peer review, prediction and scientific experimentation)
Poor little
Moloch. He can't even tell the difference between something of substance, and the theory about the hows and whys of that thing of substance. He uses the Theory of Gravity as an example. He can't even tell the difference between gravity, and the Theory of Gravity which explains how and why gravity acts as it does, and where it comes from.
Gravity is a fact! How do we know? We know because people and cars don't float off the surface of the earth. We know because the earth doesn't explode due to its centrifugal force. We know because somebody who jumps off a cliff falls to his death on the rocks below. We know because gravity causes your car keys to land on the table when you toss them there. Gravity is completely a fact, no matter what it is made out of.
The Theory of Gravity is different. How is it different? The Theory of Gravity is an attempt to explain where gravity comes from, why it works the way it does, and maybe even how to influence it to cause changes in it. The Theory takes the gravity fact, and tries to explain why gravity works as it does. The Theory of Gravity doesn't dispute the fact that gravity exists. It simply attempts to explain a bunch of things about gravity that aren't readily apparent.
How does this translate to evolution. Like this. There is the Theory of Evolution. But nobody has found any evolution example that is for-a-fact evolution.
Like the Theory of Gravity attempts to explain things about gravity, so the Theory of Evolution attempts to explain things about evolution. The big difference is that gravity abounds all over the place, and is observed and used trillions of times by billions of people and animals. Evolution is not known to factually to exist at all. The Theory of Gravity changes as we scientifically find out more and more about the gravity that we use every day. The Theory of Evolution changes as we find out more and more that evolution doesn't exist.
The Theory of Gravity can go on and on, because gravity is a known thing... known and used by everybody. The Theory of Evolution should be put to rest, because there isn't any evolution that anybody has found, and all usages of it are only guesses about its existence. The thinkers in science know this and state it. Yet evolution keeps on being promoted as fact -
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.43768381.
Evolution is a hoax.