Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?

Not all good fit models are correct. Or do you believe it to be so, LOL!

Yes, sensei. If the model conforms to the reality of the data and makes testable accurate predictions then the model is correct.That is how we know our models are correct. They fit with the data. If the data show us something other than our model then the model is not correct.

In science, good fit models are tentatively accepted as the correct model. Are we still doing real science?

You know little about science.

Being accepted does not mean that the model is correct. In regression models, we never even get the real model. Only with infinity sample size, the estimated parameters will closely approximate the real values.

You know nothing.

Well that's the point isn't it. sensei knows nothing, so he attacks the very foundations of all knowledge so that no-one else can know anything either. It would be pathetic even if it weren't the thousandth time we've seen someone try to pull this crap.Mutate and Survive

Prove it or zip it!

Reverting to making false claims now, aren't you?As to be expected from an evolutionist.

Tell us what a nested hierarchy is.

I'm simply responding to your crappy rhetoric.You whine about people wanting to compare observations against predictions, as though there existed some other way of knowing anything, but that is how science works. That is the only way of gaining reliable knowledge about reality. If we were to accept your bad faith argument, that's it - all science is gone, all knowledge, even of the most simple kind, is destroyed. No-one will be able to understand anything and whilst I can see how it might be tempting from your point of view to drag everyone else down to your level of ignorance, it's not going to fool anyone. We've seen it all before. This is boilerplate creationist blather and it's not going to fly.If you have a better method of gaining knowledge, go ahead and tell us about it. You have been asked and you have dodged the question. How would you determine if an idea is scientifically useful or not? If not empiricism, then what?If you have no alternative method (which of course you do not) then all your whining looks like an infantile attempt to escape the fact that there exist multiple lines of evidence for the ToE and you aren't up to the task of criticising them (which you are not).Mutate and Survive

Where is your proof?

Who asked you to explain science? You are a noob.Just because you think it's the only way to do science, which is debatable, does not mean that you know how to handle it. You are full of ignorance if you think the methods are perfect and flawless.

After so much time you still cannot define a nested hierarchy. As I said, you know nothing.

No-one. I decided to go ahead anyway. This is - and I know this is going to be a shock to you, but try to brace yourself - a discussion forum. It exists for the sake of discussion. That's why people come here. If you want to try to undermine all knowledge unchallenged, you would be wanting a blog. With the comments turned off. In the mean time you choose to post here and I don't have to ask your leave to post here. On the contrary, I have seen this particular stalling tactic used many times before. It's a refuge for those who have no scientific argument to bring forward. It's equivalent to someone who keeps losing at bowling, so one night they set fire to the bowling alley. It's always pathetic and frankly, I've seen it done better. Is it? Well that sounds promising! Go ahead and debate it then; what method of knowledge would you use? How do we understand anything other than comparing ideas against observations? The scientific method exists not because we are perfect, but because we are flawed. It's whole raison d'être is to minmise error, biases and so on. No-one said the scientific method was perfect, but it is a lot better than the alternative, which, as far as you are concerned at least, appears to be diddly squat.If you think the scientific method is fatally flawed, present your superior alternative. If you can't do that (spoiler alert; you can't) I guess you're stuck with the existing scientific method like the rest of us.Mutate and Survive