Should evolution be taught in high school?

Feb 24, 2008 | Posted by: Cash | Full story: www.scientificblogging.com

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."

Comments (Page 5,567)

Showing posts 111,321 - 111,340 of168,573
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114294
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
There is no way to prove that the suns light takes 8 minutes to get to earth
On the contrary, we know what the speed of light is, and we know how far the Earth is from the Sun.

Therefore, we know how long it takes for light to get from the Sun to the Earth.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114295
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
because as the sun is always shining and light bends, light reaches us before the sun rises above the horizon.
Light reaches us *on the ground* before the Sun rises above the horizon because the light is diffused by the atmosphere.
One way or another wrote:
Without colored laser light, science cannot distinguish the multiple light emissions in their collectors, that's why science uses colored laser light in its failed moon tests.
The Moon tests didn't fail. I guess you missed that fact.
Mugwump

Workington, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114296
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Ignorant and childish nonsense will be ignored. If an intelligent question or arguments comes along, I'll answer.
Ok, let's see if you are true to your word.

Question : why bother with strapping lasers (lazers?) to probes and sending them into space as you suggest when the same process can be carried on earth?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fizeau –Foucault_apparatus

Specifically - what makes your method better than the above.

Or any of these methods?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light#M...

Now if you feel this is NOT an intelligent question - please outline why.

I await your answer with a sense of hope.

Regards

Mugwump
One way or another

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114297
Jan 13, 2013
 
Science offers hearsay on its light tests. It has not offered a peer review on its moon test, besides morons that also show no proof.

If science bothered with a simple test from one of its probes, with several different countries involved and science offering the general public, first hand knowledge of how the collectors work, how they distinguish color and show the proof in present time, then could we say that we know, instead of science is full of shit.
Mugwump

Workington, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114298
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Science offers hearsay on its light tests. It has not offered a peer review on its moon test, besides morons that also show no proof.
If science bothered with a simple test from one of its probes, with several different countries involved and science offering the general public, first hand knowledge of how the collectors work, how they distinguish color and show the proof in present time, then could we say that we know, instead of science is full of shit.
And I will ask again, why go to the extreme lengths you propose when simpler tests can be carried out on earth (and have been)

You did say you would answer any intelligent questions, and if you are correct in what you say, and the rest of the scientific community is wrong, you should be able to demonstrate why.

Shouldn't you?

2nd attempt
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114299
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Ignorant and childish nonsense will be ignored. If an intelligent question or arguments comes along, I'll answer.
After all of the insanely idiotic "original work" that you've been posting here, it should be eminently clear to everyone reading these threads that you wouldn't know an intelligent question or argument if it reached out of your monitor and slapped you upside the head.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114300
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Since we see out to the light, speed of light becomes subjective, both day and night, just as we see out to the light of galaxies billions of miles away.
Riiiight. And that computer monitor in front of your face is there ONLY because your eyes beam the image of it out for you to be able to see it.

You "know" about computer monitors, therefore your brain tells your eyes which model to recreate in front of your face. Is that the way it works?

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114301
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Science offers hearsay on its light tests. It has not offered a peer review on its moon test
On the contrary, over 250 articles have appeared in peer-reviewed scientific research journals on the subject of lunar laser ranging.
Mugwump

Workington, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114302
Jan 13, 2013
 
MIDutch wrote:
<quoted text>
After all of the insanely idiotic "original work" that you've been posting here, it should be eminently clear to everyone reading these threads that you wouldn't know an intelligent question or argument if it reached out of your monitor and slapped you upside the head.
No, no, no give him some credit - he says he will answer intelligent questions about his research and I believe (unless you or he can show otherwise) I have asked just such a question.

Maybe he has missed it, or is just formulating an rational response as we speak.
One way or another

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114303
Jan 13, 2013
 
Strap? Lol

Space is not a vacuum.

The speed of light test done in a vacuum over 20 miles is total BS, as space is not a vacuum. It has trillions of tons of dust, if you believe in star nurseries, billions of miles of gas clouds, trillions of tons of plasma from the billions of suns and their ejections, trillions of tons of cosmic rays that all tend to divert and break up light, from as close as the moon, as science proves.

There is no vacuum in space, the kind that man can bring about on earth, in space, ENTIRELY DEVOID of matter.

Trillions of tons of matter is all through out space, according to science.

How is it scientists are too stupid to understand that there is no vacuum in space?

vacuum[ vak-yoom,-yoo-uh&#8201;m,- yuh&#8201;m ]
noun
1. a space entirely devoid of matter.
2. an enclosed space from which matter, especially air, has been partially removed so that the matter or gas remaining in the space exerts less pressure than the atmosphere (plenum).
3. the state or degree of exhaustion in such an enclosed space.
One way or another

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114304
Jan 13, 2013
 
Any peer review of stupidity is just stupidity.

“Happy New Year”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I found a smile

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114305
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Strap? Lol
Space is not a vacuum.
The speed of light test done in a vacuum over 20 miles is total BS, as space is not a vacuum. It has trillions of tons of dust, if you believe in star nurseries, billions of miles of gas clouds, trillions of tons of plasma from the billions of suns and their ejections, trillions of tons of cosmic rays that all tend to divert and break up light, from as close as the moon, as science proves.
There is no vacuum in space, the kind that man can bring about on earth, in space, ENTIRELY DEVOID of matter.
Trillions of tons of matter is all through out space, according to science.
How is it scientists are too stupid to understand that there is no vacuum in space?
vacuum[ vak-yoom,-yoo-uh&#8201;m,- yuh&#8201;m ]
noun
1. a space entirely devoid of matter.
2. an enclosed space from which matter, especially air, has been partially removed so that the matter or gas remaining in the space exerts less pressure than the atmosphere (plenum).
3. the state or degree of exhaustion in such an enclosed space.
If even 1 gram of matter was between your ears, we might not have the posts you produce to read for our enjoyment. Vacuum does have something to offer after all.

“Happy New Year”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I found a smile

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114306
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Strap? Lol
Space is not a vacuum.
The speed of light test done in a vacuum over 20 miles is total BS, as space is not a vacuum. It has trillions of tons of dust, if you believe in star nurseries, billions of miles of gas clouds, trillions of tons of plasma from the billions of suns and their ejections, trillions of tons of cosmic rays that all tend to divert and break up light, from as close as the moon, as science proves.
There is no vacuum in space, the kind that man can bring about on earth, in space, ENTIRELY DEVOID of matter.
Trillions of tons of matter is all through out space, according to science.
How is it scientists are too stupid to understand that there is no vacuum in space?
vacuum[ vak-yoom,-yoo-uh&#8201;m,- yuh&#8201;m ]
noun
1. a space entirely devoid of matter.
2. an enclosed space from which matter, especially air, has been partially removed so that the matter or gas remaining in the space exerts less pressure than the atmosphere (plenum).
3. the state or degree of exhaustion in such an enclosed space.
Here is a link that may help you. No it is not to a mental health organization. You will have to make those steps on your own.

http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/qa_sp_ms.html

You will notice that it points out that the vacuum of space is greater than what can be achieved in a laboratory on earth. Whether it is greater than the vacuum you have achieved cranially remains for some future scientist to determine.

“Happy New Year”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I found a smile

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114307
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Any peer review of stupidity is just stupidity.
That's just stupid.
One way or another

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114308
Jan 13, 2013
 
What proof does man have, that proves that space has less matter than what man can achieve? Has man gone through out space, gathering samples?

If as science claims that there is enough dust in space to create whole worlds and stars on a constant basis, why didn't your web site speak of that?

Keep pretending to be stupid, it fits you.
One way or another

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114309
Jan 13, 2013
 
To have star nurseries, --plural, as science claims and it takes dust beyond measure almost, to create a star, science contradicts itself terribly, while all scientist must be stupid or stoned, not to point it out to science as a whole.

“Happy New Year”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I found a smile

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114310
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
What proof does man have, that proves that space has less matter than what man can achieve? Has man gone through out space, gathering samples?
If as science claims that there is enough dust in space to create whole worlds and stars on a constant basis, why didn't your web site speak of that?
Keep pretending to be stupid, it fits you.
We are going through space right now. You have heard by now I am sure, but we have a whole program designed to explore space. It is amazing. You should really look into it. They have sent chimps into orbit, so even you have a shot at making the trip.

If you looked at the link I provided and obviously you didn't, you would have seen one way reported about how measurements of vacuum are achieved. I know, reading that pesky link would have just put rational ideas into your head and you definitely don't want that.
Mugwump

Workington, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114311
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
Ignorant and childish nonsense will be ignored. If an intelligent question or arguments comes along, I'll answer.
So just to clarify, when you posted the above - you were just adding more lies/BS to the veritable mountain you had already posted.

Good stuff - knew we would get there in the end.

We knew you couldn't back up your ideas - just wanted you to admit it.

“Happy New Year”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

I found a smile

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114312
Jan 13, 2013
 
As an aside, what the hell is up with South Carolina. Is there a moratorium on intelligence in that state I haven't heard about. It seems like a large number of idiots post on this forum from that state. Maybe it is one idiot with a lot of spare time on its hands.
LowellGuy

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114313
Jan 13, 2013
 
One way or another wrote:
To have star nurseries,--plural, as science claims and it takes dust beyond measure almost, to create a star, science contradicts itself terribly, while all scientist must be stupid or stoned, not to point it out to science as a whole.
Just admit that you, with your 10th grade education and carpetlaying experience, know more about physics and astronomy than all the physicists and astronomers and astrophysicists in the world who have actually gotten themselves educated on their specialties. Just say it. Admit what you know, deep down, is ridiculous.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 111,321 - 111,340 of168,573
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••