Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 178661 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.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#114668 Jan 18, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, Jimmy! How does fit into your light 'hypothesis'?
http://www.slashgear.com/mona-lisa-goes-to-th...
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/01/18/nas...
Maybe they could beam Jimmy there next.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#114669 Jan 18, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier if you just pointed out where you got you start point (2B bp)? from.
The starting point is the genome size of T-rex which I est. at 2B bp. Seems reasonable. Birds and reptiles range around 1B to 3B bps. Sorry, but nobody to my knowledge has ever sequenced a dino DNA last time I checked. Maybe you have another suggestion?

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#114670 Jan 18, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
Most importent I guess is the end point - number of bp remaining in the dino DNA as you suggest was found.
Or is the end point the problem for you?
I saw the amount in a rewiew of M. Schweitzer's article. I remember it was like 2,000 or 3,000 bps or not quite enough for a full gene but enough for some proteins. I tried to located the article but couldn't find it. Maybe I'll look again. But the point is that it doesn't matter. All I need is some remains. Even 1 bp would do it. If the 521 year half-life of DNA is correct, and it is published, peer-reviewed research, then this does not bode well for evolution given M. Schweitzer's research. Obviously I am thrilled and you guys hate it but it is what it is.
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#114671 Jan 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
One of my favorite Sherlock Holmes stories.
Have you watched 'Elementary'?
Of course House is also based on Holmes..... obviously.
On the Holmes front ( can you see what I did there?- comedy gold)

Not sure if depends whether you have and ipad / kindle or whatnot but you can download the Sherlock collection for free - top stuff.

And on 'elementary' and apologies for getting a patriotic on your ass - much preferred 'Sherlock', done by the BBC - starring benedict cumberbatch and Martin freeman.

It sticks reasonably closely to the books but simply set in modern times.

Oh and we did it first you thieving yank scum :-)
Elohim

Branford, CT

#114672 Jan 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Basil was great in those movies. I found Bruce's portrayal of Watson to be a bit to comic for my tastes. Not a worthy companion for Holmes. I still enjoyed the movies very much.
Jeremy Brett/Edward Hardwick are my favorite Holmes/Watson.
I was thinking the same thought about Bruce during lunchbreak. The BBC version from the '90's was great.
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#114673 Jan 18, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I saw the amount in a rewiew of M. Schweitzer's article. I remember it was like 2,000 or 3,000 bps or not quite enough for a full gene but enough for some proteins. I tried to located the article but couldn't find it. Maybe I'll look again. But the point is that it doesn't matter. All I need is some remains. Even 1 bp would do it. If the 521 year half-life of DNA is correct, and it is published, peer-reviewed research, then this does not bode well for evolution given M. Schweitzer's research. Obviously I am thrilled and you guys hate it but it is what it is.
Ok it's just that I can't see any reference in Schweitzers research to finding actual DNA - and without your endpoint (or start point depending on your point of view) then your half life argument is moot.

So yes, if you can dig out the article would be dandy.

“Cleaning Up Christianity ”

Level 5

Since: Jan 13

Topix Badlands

#114674 Jan 18, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
The only reason you'd be insulted by a factual statement like that is if you cannot handle facts. Until something is supported by substantiated evidence it is mythology. You have no evidence, so it's mythology. Simple.
Simple for the simple minded, perhaps.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#114675 Jan 18, 2013
Janitor Of The LORD wrote:
<quoted text>
Simple for the simple minded, perhaps.
What is simple for all minds, should be simple for the simple minded. That does not appear to be the case. Do you have evidence to support your claims of there being a god, specifically your god?

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#114676 Jan 18, 2013
QuiteCrazy wrote:
I don't see the point of it really. It's not proven.
Ever here the line, "We've yet to find the missing link,"?
Doesn't sound like a fact.
There is no such thing as 'A' missing link. That's a B-Movie fairytale pushed by Creationists who think it somehow damages science. The reality is we have found thousands of links, in the form of transitional fossils, that clearly demonstrate many of the changes evolutionary theory has explained.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#114677 Jan 18, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok it's just that I can't see any reference in Schweitzers research to finding actual DNA - and without your endpoint (or start point depending on your point of view) then your half life argument is moot.
So yes, if you can dig out the article would be dandy.
What do you mean you don't see any reference in Schweitzers research? It's clear as a bell! Why are you denying it? I quoted her own words. Are you saying she's a liar and the peer review process failed?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#114678 Jan 18, 2013
TedHOhio wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as 'A' missing link. That's a B-Movie fairytale pushed by Creationists who think it somehow damages science. The reality is we have found thousands of links, in the form of transitional fossils, that clearly demonstrate many of the changes evolutionary theory has explained.
I agree, but for the uneducated any transitional fossil could be called a missing link. There will always be some links never filled, it is the nature of the fossil record. Of course saying that is evidence of a miracle is the same as saying a miracle occurred if you did not have photographic evidence of your grandfather, but you had photographic evidence of your father and great grandfather.

And we could even claim that the missing link has been found, it is Homo Erectus. That is the imaginary line that Duane Gish and another creationist drew for us. I can't remember which creatard claimed what but they obviously forgot to talk to each other one claimed that H erectus was definitely a man and the other claimed he was definitely an ape. Of course the break off point from chimpanzees and bonobos was much earlier than that, I just love to use this as proof that even creationist "experts" cannot agree on who is a man and who is an ape.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#114679 Jan 18, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't want to learn then fine, stay stupid. See if I care.

You are so defensive. So you don't understand. Just say so.

You just want to plug numbers into a formula to get the answer you want. You have to understand the numbers and where they come from FIRST.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#114680 Jan 18, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The starting point is the genome size of T-rex which I est. at 2B bp. Seems reasonable. Birds and reptiles range around 1B to 3B bps. Sorry, but nobody to my knowledge has ever sequenced a dino DNA last time I checked. Maybe you have another suggestion?

Why would you go with birds and reptile DNA (remember, I am asking a creationist)?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#114681 Jan 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you go with birds and reptile DNA (remember, I am asking a creationist)?
I have to laugh at Urb who was so critical of radiometric dating (which is based on half-lives) but now hangs his hat on the very fuzzy DNA half-life.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#114682 Jan 18, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I saw the amount in a rewiew of M. Schweitzer's article. I remember it was like 2,000 or 3,000 bps or not quite enough for a full gene but enough for some proteins. I tried to located the article but couldn't find it. Maybe I'll look again. But the point is that it doesn't matter. All I need is some remains. Even 1 bp would do it. If the 521 year half-life of DNA is correct, and it is published, peer-reviewed research, then this does not bode well for evolution given M. Schweitzer's research. Obviously I am thrilled and you guys hate it but it is what it is.

I am not sure how your misunderstanding of science either hurts evolution or makes us hate Schweitzer's groundbreaking research but whatever.

The "half-life" of DNA is a bigger issue. The term "half-life" was coined in reference to the logarithmic decay of radioactive isotopes. The analogy to something as completely different as DNA is interesting but it is clear but the analogy breaks down when looking at the real world. DNA degeneration does not necessary follow the same formula and certainly does not follow the same mechanism. The conditions under which it is preserved (or not) will be the determining factor in how long it will continue to be viable (in the biochemical sense). A forensic pathologist would tell you that DNA degradation is not a constant and that the conditions of preservation will effect how how long the DNA will be around. They had a lot of trouble sequencing the DNA of Jessie James (for example) and that was only 130 years ago.

"Nuclear DNA degrades at least twice as fast as mtDNA. As such, early studies that reported recovery of much older DNA, for example from Cretaceous dinosaur remains, may have stemmed from contamination of the sample."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_DNA#Anci...

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#114683 Jan 18, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
On the Holmes front ( can you see what I did there?- comedy gold)
Not sure if depends whether you have and ipad / kindle or whatnot but you can download the Sherlock collection for free - top stuff.
And on 'elementary' and apologies for getting a patriotic on your ass - much preferred 'Sherlock', done by the BBC - starring benedict cumberbatch and Martin freeman.
It sticks reasonably closely to the books but simply set in modern times.
Oh and we did it first you thieving yank scum :-)

LOL. Yes, lets give credit where credit is due. I have not seen the newer BBC version. I will have to give them a look.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#114684 Jan 18, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Mark your calenders: Next week is the one year anniversary of Jimmy falling on his ass.(And my birthday)
I have a feeling Jimbo was falling on his ass well before someone drew a simple diagram of how to post on Topix -- in crayon.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#114685 Jan 18, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you mean you don't see any reference in Schweitzers research? It's clear as a bell! Why are you denying it? I quoted her own words. Are you saying she's a liar and the peer review process failed?

We are saying you did not understand what she said, in context.

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#114686 Jan 18, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, but for the uneducated any transitional fossil could be called a missing link. There will always be some links never filled, it is the nature of the fossil record. Of course saying that is evidence of a miracle is the same as saying a miracle occurred if you did not have photographic evidence of your grandfather, but you had photographic evidence of your father and great grandfather.
And we could even claim that the missing link has been found, it is Homo Erectus. That is the imaginary line that Duane Gish and another creationist drew for us. I can't remember which creatard claimed what but they obviously forgot to talk to each other one claimed that H erectus was definitely a man and the other claimed he was definitely an ape. Of course the break off point from chimpanzees and bonobos was much earlier than that, I just love to use this as proof that even creationist "experts" cannot agree on who is a man and who is an ape.
And they never will agree, because if they actually settled on a specific definition, we would use it to demolish even more of their arguments. As it is, we keep demolishing moving targets, a little more challenging, but not significantly.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#114687 Jan 18, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to laugh at Urb who was so critical of radiometric dating (which is based on half-lives) but now hangs his hat on the very fuzzy DNA half-life.

The whole science he is now embracing has been long subject to his denial efforts. It is amusing for him to now go on as if all these dating methods are true AND still deny dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago. Sadly, he will never understand why this makes us laugh.

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) 21 min Gary Coaldigger 20,499
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Paul Porter1 171,598
Darwinism: Science or Philosophy? 2 hr Paul Porter1 27
Darwin, Marx, and Freud 2 hr Paul Porter1 4
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 5 hr DanFromSmithville 142,483
News Pope Francis Affirms Evolution and Big Bang Theory 6 hr Paul Porter1 213
Beware of Kamikaze Snakes. They Are Evolving in... 12 hr Zog Has-fallen 4
More from around the web