Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 178616 comments on the www.scientificblogging.com story from Feb 24, 2008, titled Should evolution be taught in high school?. In it, www.scientificblogging.com reports that:

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."

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.scientificblogging.com.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#111013 Dec 5, 2012
I think there may be a misunderstanding regarding my position on social darwinism and the holocaust. The German scientist did measure prisoners "fitness" with their laboratory instruments and sterilize and kill them by the millions; however, this was pseudoscience. It was social darwinism, or racism masquarading as science.

Just consider this when you are so quick to criticize me for judging other "Christians" who reject the word of God. Christians who reject Jesus Christ and His Word are about as legitimate as the German "scientist" in lab coats at Auschwitz.
defender

London, KY

#111014 Dec 5, 2012
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>Does nutmeg evolve into mace? This is important!
You try sooo hard to be funny... But only end up as pathetic ....

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#111015 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Maybe there is some and it's ignored?
Fat chance. Controversial and exciting finds would be trumpeted.
2. Those animals don't normally live on the ocean floor.
No, that is too simplistic. Miacids did not live on the ocean floor, do share many characteristics found in later carnivores, more closely resembled the Fossa mentioned above...and there are no cat or dog fossils in those strata. There is fossil convergence with Miacids as we go back from the present to the 35 m year old strata. Funny that.
3. If a flood were coming, they would head for higher ground.
Even you know this is one of the most feeble and senseless of the creationist defenses. Did the modern grasses (a relatively recent form of life) run with them, leaving the slower ferns and mosses behind?
4. I wouldn't expect them to be found with trilobites.
Neither would I. Though perhaps one might have expected to see the odd sardine, shark, whales, or seal down there with them, since they supposedly all coexisted back then...and there are NONE. Not even a lobe finned fish!

There are, however, some very primitive jawless fish, the early representatives of the later chordate line.

hmmmmm. Exactly what evolution would predict, and creationism has no answer for. I do note that the more you get to understand the arguments we present, the more you are leaning on conspiracy explanations as per (1) above! Give it up man! The more obvious explanation is that you are wrong!

What is faster...a tyrannosaurus or a giant sloth? Whadya reckon?
defender

London, KY

#111016 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>BS! Dog kind. Cat kind. E.coli after 50,000 generations still 100% E.coli. The living fossil record. Wide genetic variation within the Created kind. Look at the range of everything from HIV virus (which is really not a complete living species) and the range of humans. Humans range from under 4 feet to over 7 feet and come in all shapes and sizes. Nothing has ever "macro-evolved" into some different kind.
True...

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#111017 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The Nazi scientists embraced Darwinism as promoted in Germany and applied those racist principles. There is no other explanation.
Nobody had heard of selective breeding until Darwin! Those Spartans (also admired by Hitler), that is just propaganda made up by the notorious Darwinists Herodotus and Thucydides!

All those farmers breeding Clydesdales and Jersey Cows, never heard of selective breeding!
The US Holocaust Museum tell this story of scientists measuring racial features and those with deficiencies,
Yes. Farmers have been doing the same thing for millennia. Noooo it all Darwin's fault!
This was all mixed up with religious hatred of the Jews and Christians and whether you were ugly or disabled or sick or anything significantly deviating from the pure race.
Hatred of the Christians? No buddy, this time it was YOUR lot doing the persecution. God is With Us, on the belt buckles of the murderous Gestapo. If anything, Christians used perverted versions of Darwinism to justify the Final Solution to their centuries of irrational hatred towards the Jews!

Perhaps you might be getting a glimmer of how stupid this argument is, whichever way you look at it. Hitler used whatever was to hand in a maniacal fashion. Christianity, race theories, Germanic folklore.

Get real.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#111018 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
I think there may be a misunderstanding regarding my position on social darwinism and the holocaust. The German scientist did measure prisoners "fitness" with their laboratory instruments and sterilize and kill them by the millions; however, this was pseudoscience. It was social darwinism, or racism masquarading as science.
Just consider this when you are so quick to criticize me for judging other "Christians" who reject the word of God. Christians who reject Jesus Christ and His Word are about as legitimate as the German "scientist" in lab coats at Auschwitz.
Now you accept that trying to present a perversion of darwinism as an argument against darwinism is no more valid than others presenting perversions of christianity as arguments against "the real thing"? Good, there's a start.

Hitler's experiment was not social darwinism either! The latter just says - capitalism should be left unhindered by social welfare because the weak should be left to die if they cannot foot it by their own efforts. That has a familiar ring to it....aren't you a staunch republican BTW?
defender

London, KY

#111019 Dec 5, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>If you go back far enough in the fossil record, there are no dogs and no cats. Just a creature that has cat like and dog like characteristics, called a Miacid.

Remember:

1. divergence from modern forms as we go back in time.
2. convergence with closely related forms as we go back in time.

"The superfamily Miacoidea can be divided into two families: the Miacidae and the Viverravidae. The Miacidae evolved into the caniforms (dogs, bear-dogs, bears, raccoons and weasels), while the Viverravidae evolved into the feliforms (cats, hyaenas and mongooses)."

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action...

Question Mr Creationist:

1. Why are there no cats and dogs (or bears, hyenas, raccoons, mongooses) in strata dated at more than 30 million years? Even ignoring our dating, why none in the lower strata?

2. Why ARE there creatures that conform to evolution's view of what a common ancestor to this large group would look like? Where did it go?

3. Why does even this critter, the miacid, show links to even earlier placental mammals etc. Where did they go?

4. Why don't we see any dogs before miacids in the strata?

Too funny.
1) Yet they find a 47 million year old cat, study it in secret for two years name it Ida then try to pass it off as the great missing link....

2) How do you know the Miacidae didn't die out altogether and modern day cats and dogs didn't evolve from slugs or ancient crawfish?... Why not? In this goofy theory anything goes...

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#111020 Dec 5, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you accept that trying to present a perversion of darwinism as an argument against darwinism is no more valid than others presenting perversions of christianity as arguments against "the real thing"? Good, there's a start.
Hitler's experiment was not social darwinism either! The latter just says - capitalism should be left unhindered by social welfare because the weak should be left to die if they cannot foot it by their own efforts. That has a familiar ring to it....aren't you a staunch republican BTW?
Social Darwinism's worst manifestations were artificial selection (sterilization and extermination) of human beings as happened at Auschwitz. You can see this presented in the Smithsonian Holocaust Museum.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111021 Dec 5, 2012
Psychology wrote:
<quoted text>
How true that is.
At least wiki is based on evidence. Unlike what you say, which is based solely upon your own baseless assertions and psychological malfunctions.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111022 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Social Darwinism's worst manifestations were artificial selection (sterilization and extermination) of human beings as happened at Auschwitz. You can see this presented in the Smithsonian Holocaust Museum.
But, Darwin had nothing to do with any of that, and Darwin's theory had nothing to do with that. It's a perversion of a term coined by Darwin that was used as a pseudonym for a program of torture and murder. By the way, remind us all what religion Hitler was, and whether the writings of Martin Luther in any way influenced German anti-semitism.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111023 Dec 5, 2012
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
1) Yet they find a 47 million year old cat, study it in secret for two years name it Ida then try to pass it off as the great missing link....
2) How do you know the Miacidae didn't die out altogether and modern day cats and dogs didn't evolve from slugs or ancient crawfish?... Why not? In this goofy theory anything goes...
Cats are primates? Fascinating. Tell us more of this "science."

Also, DNA and ERVs are a major way of determining lineage. Unless you're saying DNA paternity tests don't work...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111024 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
We've been over this several times. The chick and the egg are still alive because and due to the information in the DNA which is deteriorating slowly due to mutations. THis is the same argument about growth and development and is bogus. Wise up already.
Yes, genetic entropy IS bogus. It's about time you admitted it.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111025 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Maybe there is some and it's ignored?
Ah, right...the global conspiracy theory. That's probably it.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
2. Those animals don't normally live on the ocean floor.
But, we should find them all in the same stratum, because they're all of similar mobility.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
3. If a flood were coming, they would head for higher ground.
But, we don't find evidence that supports this. And, the flood STILL doesn't explain shells INSIDE mountaintops (not ON mountaintops...do you understand the difference between inside and on?).
Urban Cowboy wrote:
4. I wouldn't expect them to be found with trilobites.
Let me get this straight: you'd expect the more mobile animals to go to higher ground, but you wouldn't expect to find them in the same stratum as mollusks, which we find buried inside mountaintops. Mountains ARE higher ground, which is where we should expect to find the most mobile animals (according to you), and which is exactly where we shouldn't expect to find mollusk fossils. Yet, we find mollusk fossils INSIDE mountaintops, and we don't find any of the more mobile animal fossils in (or on) mountaintops. How do you expect the exact opposite of what we find, and then declare yourself the victor? Please, explain.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111026 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The Nazi scientists embraced Darwinism as promoted in Germany and applied those racist principles. There is no other explanation. The US Holocaust Museum tell this story of scientists measuring racial features and those with deficiencies, i.e, anything that deviated from German purity to sterilize and murder because of Darwinism and natural selection and survival of the fittest. This was all mixed up with religious hatred of the Jews and Christians and whether you were ugly or disabled or sick or anything significantly deviating from the pure race. Sterilized and murdered. It is a fact Mr. Holocaust denier-wackjob.
Why burn Darwin's books when they were the alleged centerpiece of the Nazi strategy? If anything, you'd think they'd want it spread further! Sorry, but your story doesn't make any sense. You don't hide the information you're using to justify your actions (unless it actually undermines them, such as by claiming that we're all equally human, which contradicted the "Jews aren't fully human" claims made by the Nazi party). Now, do you have something sensible to say, or are you going to continue your lies? As though we don't already know the answer...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111027 Dec 5, 2012
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Umm no it's a claim evolutionist have never proven... Ever...
Oh, so there IS a hard border to evolution. Great. Just demonstrate this, and claim your Nobel Prize.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111028 Dec 5, 2012
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
You try sooo hard to be funny... But only end up as pathetic ....
Hey, I'm not the one talking about evolution of spices.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111029 Dec 5, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
BS! Dog kind. Cat kind. E.coli after 50,000 generations still 100% E.coli. The living fossil record. Wide genetic variation within the Created kind. Look at the range of everything from HIV virus (which is really not a complete living species) and the range of humans. Humans range from under 4 feet to over 7 feet and come in all shapes and sizes. Nothing has ever "macro-evolved" into some different kind.
What "kind" is a panda? What about a lemur? Sea urchin? Porcupine? Mudskipper? Archaeopteryx? Ostrich? Hummingbird? Megatherium?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#111030 Dec 5, 2012
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
1) Yet they find a 47 million year old cat, study it in secret for two years name it Ida then try to pass it off as the great missing link....
2) How do you know the Miacidae didn't die out altogether and modern day cats and dogs didn't evolve from slugs or ancient crawfish?... Why not? In this goofy theory anything goes...
No cat had characteristics anything like Ida. On the other hand, primates do.

Nope, cats evolving from crawfish would violate the nested hierarchy. What "goes" in evolution is tightly constrained by the nested hierarchy. Unlike the unconstrained imaginations of creation fantasists.

You are talking pure Shyt. Enough said.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#111031 Dec 5, 2012
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Inside the spices yes but not transitional to completely different ones...
It's microevolution all the way. Homo Erectus is an ancestor of Homo Sapiens. Sapiens is the same genre as Erectus, but new species. There's no need to even use the term "macro" because evolution does not take giant steps from one generation to the next. It's all micro, with mutations plus genetic drift.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#111032 Dec 5, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No cat had characteristics anything like Ida. On the other hand, primates do.
Nope, cats evolving from crawfish would violate the nested hierarchy. What "goes" in evolution is tightly constrained by the nested hierarchy. Unlike the unconstrained imaginations of creation fantasists.
You are talking pure Shyt. Enough said.
Did you know a lion can mate with tiger or cheetah or a cougar or a puma or a panther? Ligors and tions, etc. Similarly, wolves can mate with coyotes or beagles or german shepherds.

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
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 13 min DanFromSmithville 164,191
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 6 hr thetruth 19,049
How can we prove God exists, or does not? Tue Gillette 84
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) Tue DanFromSmithville 141,352
has science finally debunked the 'god' myth? May 24 UncommonSense2015 10
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) May 24 Chimney1 1,871
News British Ban Teaching Creationism As Science, Sh... (Jul '14) May 23 Swedenforever 159
More from around the web