Should evolution be taught in high school?

Feb 24, 2008 Full story: www.scientificblogging.com 175,408

Microbiologist Carl Woese is well known as an iconoclast. At 79 years of age, Woese is still shaking things up. Most recently, he stated in an interview with Wired that...

"My feeling is that evolution shouldn't be taught at the lower grades. You don't teach quantum mechanics in the grade schools. One has to be quite educated to work with these concepts; what they pass on as evolution in high schools is nothing but repetitious tripe that teachers don't understand." Full Story

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#103800 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
So where does earth get its energy from?
The Earth gets its energy from the Sun.

And in answer to your second question, no, that is from the definition of entropy. From the very start of the Wiki article on entropy:
Entropy is a thermodynamic property that is the measure of a systemís thermal energy per unit temperature that is unavailable for doing useful work.
They worded it better since it is obvious that the higher the amount of entropy with that definition the less energy there is available for work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy
LowellGuy

United States

#103801 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
So where does earth get its energy from?
Primarily from the sun. Also, nuclear fusion in the Earth's core. A little is cosmic radiation. Therefore, the Earth is an open system, so it's entropy can decrease while the net entropy of the universe increases, just like a particular stock can skyrocket during a stock market decline.
LowellGuy

United States

#103802 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
Ah, entropy only exists when and where you say. Hahahahahahaha
It demands more energy to make more bone and muscle mass.
Indeed. If only there were such a thing as food.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103803 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
I have some new stuff for you!:-) but if you dare, answer the above question first.

What question?

Why doesn't Jim understand basic science?

My guess is that he was never taught properly.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103804 Oct 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it hasn't been billions of years.

Yes it has.

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php...
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> We are now observing the most distant reaches of the cosmos with Hubble and guess what? The galaxies at the edge are just the same as the one we're in. Blue stars are new and they should be long gone but there's still plenty of them..

Why would they be long gone? We are looking back through 12 billion years of time. They are very young galaxys.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> Planets such as Mercury are still hot which doesn't make sense in a billion year old universe.


I think you smoke crack before you post. Why would mercury not be hot? It is close to the sun and has a hot core? It would be a mystery if it were NOT hot.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> Comets are measured to last only thousands of years.

Life of a comet depend on its orbit and how often it approaches the sun. The life span for a comet could be from thousands of years to 100 billion years depending on the orbit. Most comets have a VERY long orbit.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> Saturns rings are recent and are deteorating.

This is actually true. How dare you say something that is true! Won't satan be angry with you?
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> Moon recession indicates a young moon.

No, the recession of the moon indicates the moon is about 4.3 billion years old. Nearly exactly what we expect.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> Spiral galaxies are not wound up as they must be if very old. It's obviously a young universe.

Not sure what you are talking about. Theory would state that galaxies would go through periods of being both spiral and irregular in form. The presence of dark matter may keep them in a spiral shape longer.

Nonsense Refuted by Dogen.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103805 Oct 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Neandertals are easily within the range of human variation alive today. They were fully human.

Okay, we can play that way. Then were is the dividing line between modern humans and not modern humans?

Is Orrorin tugenensis a fully modern human?

Ardipithecus ramidus?

Australopithecus afarensis?

Kenyanthropus platyops?

Australopithecus sediba?

Homo habilis?

Homo rudolfensis?

Paranthropus boisei?

Homo erectus?

Homo gautengensis?

Homo heidelbergensis?

Homo sapiens idaltu?

Homo neanderthalensis?

Where do you want the line drawn? I leave this decision to your wisdom. Which are fully modern humans and which are not?

I predict you will not respond to this post in any reasonable way, if at all.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Pompano Beach, FL

#103806 Oct 7, 2012
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's deal with your "genetic entropy" first. I've asked before, and you've never given an answer, so we'll try again.
If deleterious mutations happen at a certain average rate (which they must), then we can calculate when total genetic meltdown will occur. Do the math and tell us when that will be.
Looks like we're almost there!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_...

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103807 Oct 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
The Mariner 10 spacecraft meaured the planet Mercury's magnetic field back in 1975, and then the spacecraft Messenger measured in 2008 and then again in 2011. First of all, any meaurement of a magnetic field on Mercury contradicts evolutionary expectations.

I'm sorry, but I don't remember Darwin or any other "evolutionist" weighing in on what the magnetic field on Mercury should be. If I am wrong then please cite your source.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Because it was expected that such a small planet "millions" of years old should no longer have one.

Humm... That sounds more like what a planetary geologist would expect, not an evolutionist. Maybe you were just confused.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
But these three measurements show a steady decline in strength, first by a few percent at the second measurement in 2008, and then in the recent orbit in 2011 a whopping 7.8% decrease in strength since 1975.
http://creation.com/mercury-magnetized-crust

You know how much respect we have for creationist comic books.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Mercury's craters are young also, as evidence by the Blue Hollows or actively decaying volatile deposits on and off craters which proves the craters can not be millions of years old.

Correct. Due to its hot core and proximity to the sun mercury gets resurfaced frequently. This is standard for planets with hot cores.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
"Mercury does not conform to theory" and is "not the planet described in the textbooks"
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-0...

No doubt it does not conform to the Mercury I learned about in school in the 70's. But science had very little data on Mercury back then. Science is always open to change and new information. Religious dogma is not.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Pompano Beach, FL

#103808 Oct 7, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes it has.
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php...
<quoted text>
Why would they be long gone? We are looking back through 12 billion years of time. They are very young galaxys.
<quoted text>
I think you smoke crack before you post. Why would mercury not be hot? It is close to the sun and has a hot core? It would be a mystery if it were NOT hot.
<quoted text>
Life of a comet depend on its orbit and how often it approaches the sun. The life span for a comet could be from thousands of years to 100 billion years depending on the orbit. Most comets have a VERY long orbit.
<quoted text>
This is actually true. How dare you say something that is true! Won't satan be angry with you?
<quoted text>
No, the recession of the moon indicates the moon is about 4.3 billion years old. Nearly exactly what we expect.
<quoted text>
Not sure what you are talking about. Theory would state that galaxies would go through periods of being both spiral and irregular in form. The presence of dark matter may keep them in a spiral shape longer.
Nonsense Refuted by Dogen.
Mercury point was a late night mistake. So I further investigated. Wow! Better than I could have imagined.(Magentic strength present and declining, Blue Hollows forming on young craters, etc.) It certainly is a young universe.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103809 Oct 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Evidence that Neanderthals lived hundreds of years:
"As noted earlier, Cuozzo showed by his X-ray studies of Neanderthal skulls that these were people who must have lived for hundreds of years (Cuozzo 1998a). Not only that, his computerized modeling of skull changes with age predicted development of exactly the kind of characteristics that these Neanderthal skulls displayed (Cuozzo 1998b). This meant that there had to have been some very, very old people somewhere in our history."
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/...

Dr. Jack Cuozzo is an orthodontist.

Dr. Cuozzo's publishing efforts have included three articles in the Journal of the New Jersey Dental Society and 1 creotard rag.

NEXT!

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103810 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, I see you're getting very creative in your searches, very nice!

He gets them from creotard rags. They were refuted already.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103811 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't entropy dictate loss over time? Well, from Neanderthals till now, it sure seems that human kind has lost quite a lot of bone and muscle mass.

And our brain has doubled in size.

Earlier human ancestors were smaller than we are.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103812 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
It seems the children forgot to address the following that you brought.
Mercury's craters are young also, as evidence by the Blue Hollows or actively decaying volatile deposits on and off craters which proves the craters can not be millions of years old.

I addressed it. Warm core. Mercury also seems to have plate techtonics.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103813 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
So where does earth get its energy from?

Mass is the source of gravity. But physics does not fully understand why yet. Mass warps space-time as predicted by Einstein.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Pompano Beach, FL

#103814 Oct 7, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, we can play that way. Then were is the dividing line between modern humans and not modern humans?
Is Orrorin tugenensis a fully modern human?
Ardipithecus ramidus?
Australopithecus afarensis?
Kenyanthropus platyops?
Australopithecus sediba?
Homo habilis?
Homo rudolfensis?
Paranthropus boisei?
Homo erectus?
Homo gautengensis?
Homo heidelbergensis?
Homo sapiens idaltu?
Homo neanderthalensis?
Where do you want the line drawn? I leave this decision to your wisdom. Which are fully modern humans and which are not?
I predict you will not respond to this post in any reasonable way, if at all.
OK the first one, Orrorin tugenensis, there was only a some fragments of remains found so impossible to determine what it is. But your theory has the answer, right?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103815 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
Ah, entropy only exists when and where you say. Hahahahahahaha
It demands more energy to make more bone and muscle mass.

Entropy only fully applies to closed systems. Entropy also exists in open systems, of course, but to gain more mass one only needs to consume more food (an abundant source of energy).

Humans tend to consume more energy than we use (which is why we gain weight).

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103816 Oct 7, 2012
Psychology wrote:
Mans food supply is going to hell. Entropy is going to roar soon enough, while disease will run rampant.

You might want to read about entropy before commenting on it so as not to look foolish.

Here is a short basic article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103817 Oct 7, 2012
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Primarily from the sun. Also, nuclear fusion in the Earth's core. A little is cosmic radiation. Therefore, the Earth is an open system, so it's entropy can decrease while the net entropy of the universe increases, just like a particular stock can skyrocket during a stock market decline.

The core does not generate nuclear fusion. It does generate radioactivity and heat from pressure.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Pompano Beach, FL

#103818 Oct 7, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, we can play that way. Then were is the dividing line between modern humans and not modern humans?
Is Orrorin tugenensis a fully modern human?
Ardipithecus ramidus?
Australopithecus afarensis?
Kenyanthropus platyops?
Australopithecus sediba?
Homo habilis?
Homo rudolfensis?
Paranthropus boisei?
Homo erectus?
Homo gautengensis?
Homo heidelbergensis?
Homo sapiens idaltu?
Homo neanderthalensis?
Where do you want the line drawn? I leave this decision to your wisdom. Which are fully modern humans and which are not?
I predict you will not respond to this post in any reasonable way, if at all.
Next on the list is:

"The fossils of Ardipithecus have not yet been studied by researchers beyond the original (2009) group of describers, and the paleobiology and relationships of these creatures are the subject of controversy.[16][17] Skeptics claim that many of the allegedly hominin-like features seen in the Ardipithecus material are found elsewhere among living and fossil primates, and that claims about its hominin status and locomotor habits are not adequately supported by the available evidence."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ardipithecus

Man, this is going even better than I thought! I can't wait to look up the next one!

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#103819 Oct 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like we're almost there!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_...

That is just a list of genetic disorders. It has nothing to do with entropy.

You do know it takes just as much energy to duplicate DNA correctly as it does to duplicate it incorrectly,.... right?

So, do you actually have anything that shows that entropy is occurring in the genome?

[crickets heard chirping]

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 10 min Blitzking 126,550
Darwin on the rocks 1 hr Chimney1 814
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 1 hr Brian_G 13,571
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 3 hr Chimney1 139,170
More Theories to Disprove Creation 4 hr The Dude 25
Atheism - A Non Prophet Organisation (Mar '11) 4 hr The Dude 993
Quran descendants of apes and pigs cursed by Al... (Sep '08) 5 hr DanFromSmithville 10
Ohio one step closer to allowing creationism in... 6 hr DanFromSmithville 214

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE