Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180279 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

West Palm Beach, FL

#111325 Dec 7, 2012
Elohim wrote:
<quoted text>If I was on a jury deciding a death penalty case I'd say quite a bit.
You want to legalize murder, isn't that right?

You want to make it legal for the following:

1. Woman is pregnant but decides she doesn't want the baby (before or after birth) so can kill it.

2. Someone decides it's inconvenient to care for an apparently sick person so can kill the person.

3. Now that it's ok to murder in those situations, we have some new situations to consider, i.e., disabled, challenged, eugenics, etc., etc.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

West Palm Beach, FL

#111326 Dec 7, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
When you first put the paella into your refrigerator it is warmer than its surroundings. That temperature difference represents an ability to do work. As it cools to the ambient temperature of the refrigerator its entropy goes up since there is no longer a heat difference and it cannot do work. And since the ability to do work has gone down the entropy of the system has gone up.
Wrong. LOL!

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#111327 Dec 7, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't be so quick to retract. Eugene is a known crackpot who thinks he's much smarter than Einstein and is actually proud of the fact his church had him arrested. Rummage through his "Everything Ridiculous" website sometime and you will see what I mean. It will also cost your several IQ points if you spend too much time there. Be warned.

Yep, complete wack job. Frankly these forums are a haven for the untreated mentally ill. There is a lot more going on with Shubee than just dogmatic religious beliefs.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#111328 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong. LOL!
No, really. What do you think that entropy is?
Elohim

Branford, CT

#111329 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You want to legalize murder, isn't that right?
You want to make it legal for the following:
1. Woman is pregnant but decides she doesn't want the baby (before or after birth) so can kill it.
2. Someone decides it's inconvenient to care for an apparently sick person so can kill the person.
3. Now that it's ok to murder in those situations, we have some new situations to consider, i.e., disabled, challenged, eugenics, etc., etc.
What medical procedures a woman and her doctor decide on is neither your business or mine. The rest of your rant is meaningless.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#111330 Dec 7, 2012
Urb, since in the vague terms you phrased this we have to look at this as a usefulness problem. And from the Wiki entry on entropy, which covers the subject rather well:
Relating entropy to energy usefulness
Following on from the above, it is possible (in a thermal context) to regard entropy as an indicator or measure of the effectiveness or usefulness of a particular quantity of energy.[47] This is because energy supplied at a high temperature (i.e. with low entropy) tends to be more useful than the same amount of energy available at room temperature. Mixing a hot parcel of a fluid with a cold one produces a parcel of intermediate temperature, in which the overall increase in entropy represents a “loss” which can never be replaced.
Thus, the fact that the entropy of the universe is steadily increasing, means that its total energy is becoming less useful: eventually, this will lead to the "heat death of the Universe".
The paella when first put into the refrigerator was warmer, it was at a lower entropy. When it cooled its entropy rose.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#111331 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
The energy source (The Sun) for the entire food chain/web (producers-consumers-decompose rs) is subject to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, as well as those ecosystems that get their energy from hydrothermal vents, because the geological mechanism, i.e., friction, that causes those vents is also weakening and deteriorating over time, just like everything else.
The development and growth of an organism is not an exception because the organism is already alive - and obeys the law: life only comes from life - and its biological mechanisms are just following the genetically coded instructions, as this will continue as long as it lives (if it can avoid disease) and continues with healthy celluar respiration and reproduces successfully and continues to receive proper sunlight, water, nourishment, ect.
However, whenever the organism reproduces offspring (or exposed to permanent harmful radiation) and during cellular replication, genetic mutations occur due to copying errors and deleterious mutations accumulate with each generation.(For humans, the rate is about 60 new muatations per generation, none of which have ever been documented to create any new or nascent limb or organ).
Therefore, this time arrow is a one-way, dead-end street toward increased entropy and eventual genetic meltdown, the same as it is everywhere and with everything else in the universe. So if the orignal genomes of species were fresh and new in the beginning, they have been slowly deteriorating over time due to the accumulation of errors and this shows that macroevolution could have never happened.
Yes, about 60 new mutations per generation for humans. But all mutations are not equal.

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

Mutations are either harmful, neutral or helpful. And yes, it would be reasonable to assume that if all the harmful mutations accumulated in each generation were to be "fixed" in the population, we humans would probably have been extinct a long time ago. However, that's not how things actually work.

from the above link:
"The distribution of fitness effects of new mutations is an important parameter in population genetics and has been the subject of extensive investigation [1] Although measurements of this distribution have been inconsistent in the past, it is now generally thought that the majority of mutations are mildly deleterious, that many are have little effect on an organisms fitness, and that a few can be favorable. As a result of natural selection, unfavorable mutations will typically be eliminated from a population while favorable changes are quickly fixed, and neutral changes accumulate at the rate they are created by mutations."

And yes, mutations do not create whole new organs all at once. The ToE does not predict such events. Rather, they do create small changes in existing organs. These changes will follow the rules of mutations in general: they are either harmful, helpful or neutral. The harmful mutations tend to be eliminated, the neutral mutations tend to be passed on and the helpful mutations tend to be fixed. Over vast periods of time and many, many generations, new functions are created.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#111332 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Curious, where did these life dimensions come from?
The same place up/down, depth and time came from. Maybe the whole thing as a singularity, before it broke up into separate dimensions, was a complete living thing. Maybe that was the god of Spinoza. But don't expect any proof from me. I just like the idea.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#111333 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Dude, get hold of yourself!
So what do you think of the mother who claimed that she was commanded by god to drown her children in a bathtub?

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#111334 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
But the mutations continue to accumulate and if there is close family inbreeding, the recessive genes will surface and cause disease.
Yes. But inbreeding is the exception, rather than the rule.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#111335 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I read in my creationist newsletter that the Dalai Lama doesn't believe in Evolution.
This would be a LIE!

"...Despite the success of the Darwinian narrative, I do not believe that all the elements of the story are in place. To begin with, although Darwin's theory gives a coherent account of the development of life on this planet and the various principles underlying it, such as natural selection, I am not persuaded that it answers the fundamental question of the origin of life."

From The Universe in a Single Atom: Convergence of Science and Spirituality by H.H. the Dalai Lama.

He may be a Theistic Evolutionist and inserts his own metaphysical meaning into the origin of life, but that does NOT mean he thinks that the Theory of Evolution is invalid.

As is ALWAYS the case, your "creationist newsletter" isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#111336 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Christ is God.
You "xristians" have been a 2000+ year ABYSMAL FAILURE at demonstrating that your "god" exists, let alone that "it" is the Christ.

There is JUST AS MUCH logic, reasoning, research and empirical evidence for the existence of Amun-Ra, Zeus and Odin as there is for Yahweh ... and their stories are so much better.

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#111337 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You want to legalize murder, isn't that right?
You want to make it legal for the following:
1. Woman is pregnant but decides she doesn't want the baby (before or after birth) so can kill it.
2. Someone decides it's inconvenient to care for an apparently sick person so can kill the person.
3. Now that it's ok to murder in those situations, we have some new situations to consider, i.e., disabled, challenged, eugenics, etc., etc.
Since when did it become your choice what a woman does or does not do with her own body?

The decision for abortion is mostly (not always) taken on health grounds by qualified professionals, not convenience of oh, god won’t like it

And because you have made that choice women are being threatened, doctors and health workers attacked, even killed and clinics are being destroyed and bombed.

As a good christian do you not feel that such abuse of the person and property is a little disproportionate?

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#111338 Dec 7, 2012
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Clearly, the point is that Sanford's genomic degeneration theorem is irrefutable and that Darwin's philosophy is an absurd non-science that doesn't even pass the threshold of anecdote.
http://everythingimportant.org/genome.pdf
So yes, genetic drift is highly probable over long periods of time. It tells us that, even if we could somehow find a homo erectus today, it would not be able to generate offspring with modern homo sapiens.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111339 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
But you're OK with killing millions of unborn children each year, right? Probably leaning toward legalizing euthanasia, too I would guess. So you are no different than the Nazis. God Created us so he can destroy us if we disobey bad enough. The rules were different before Christ came along.
Your God commanded the killing of unborn children.

Why were the rules different before Jesus came along? If God's decisions are perfect, then God's rules were perfect, and thus not in need of any alteration.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111340 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The energy from the refrigerator. The refrigerated air keeps my leftover paella from spoiling.
Wrong. The refrigerator's inherent energy in no way contributes to the reduced entropy inside its cabin. If you mean energy introduced to the refrigerator from outside, that would be correct. Either you knew that and lied, or you're too stupid to realize refrigerators have to be plugged in. Which is it? Liar or moron?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#111341 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Temporarily, and as long as the refrigerator receives electricity and is working properly, my paella's entropy is being reduced. And this also is in keeping with the law of entropy in that the energy coming from the machinery is more complex than the leftover paella receiving it. This works every time.
Ah, so you admit that it's NOT the refrigerator's energy that reduces the entropy inside, but energy introduced from outside.

Do humans receive energy from outside and convert it in order to reduce their local entropy? Is a zygote more or less complex than a grown adult?

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#111342 Dec 7, 2012
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>That's hilarious. It's logically equivalent to saying that evolution is reversible when natural selection is operating.
It depends on the size of the population. If a given trait is lost in the entire genome, it is lost forever. But if a trait is lost in part of the genome, future generations, through natural selection, can restore that trait to the entire genome. The smaller the population the harder it is to fix deleterious mutations.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#111343 Dec 7, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't be so quick to retract. Eugene is a known crackpot who thinks he's much smarter than Einstein and is actually proud of the fact his church had him arrested. Rummage through his "Everything Ridiculous" website sometime and you will see what I mean. It will also cost your several IQ points if you spend too much time there. Be warned.
Ah, the "all over the map" crackpot types. That makes sense now. I could pinpoint his .... erm .. point in anything so far.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#111344 Dec 7, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> The rules were different before Christ came along.

Jesus denies this.

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 32 min Subduction Zone 57,715
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr STEPIN IN 219,579
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 1 hr IB DaMann 1,744
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr ChromiuMan 159,188
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr IB DaMann 27,214
News Intelligent Design Education Day Fri Dogen 1
News Betsy DeVos' Code Words for Creationism Offshoo... Feb 16 scientia potentia... 1
More from around the web