[shunyadragon]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
Actually, she can refute evolution if she had new contradictory data which does not fit the current model. But either way, she has to provide the set of data which has been obtained scientifically.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

The newer contradictory data does not refute evolution. Like science throughout history a lot of new data contradictes current views. That's how science changes.

Example: New data on Potassium/Argon content in volcanic rocks in New Zealand does not fit the data we have for the rest of the world. This is contradictory data, but it does not refute evolution or radio active decay dating methods. It tells us that the K/Ar ratio in this particular environment is different than we originally thought. Scientists will be looking more closely at the K/Ar ratios in diferent volcanic rocks in different environments to better understand the reasons behind this anomoly.