Re: 10 red flag warnings for pseudoscience
Youre attempting to save face here more than anything else. I appreciated your intellectual humility when you admitted you were wrong (dead wrong, actually) when you claimed that falsification was dismissed from the practice of science You should have left it at that.
"Modifying" falsification/testability to a degree to suit a hypothesis would put at risk the goal of an unbiased conclusion.
Tweaking testability is also a concern as it relates to keeping science honest. One would have to immediately question why it would be necessary to modify the testability of a hypothesis such as aB. I am not sure what are the terms aB is working with and how those terms relate to auxiliary hypothesis of aB, and how sound the terms are. I don't know. I'm an armchair lover of Philosophy of Science and am not a scientist involved in the particulars of aB.
Do you know the answers to those questions? Let me know.
You are being presumptuous here with Popper as it relates directly to aB
Popper dismissed his idea that evolution itself was not and should not be considered pseudo science. To my knowledge, he had no chance to chime in on aB and you shouldn't be speaking for him here (which essentially you are). Did he? Prove me wrong then.
aB seems to be a rather extreme extension of the theory of evolution which deals with the process of evolutionary development and NOT Origins.