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
112,221 - 112,240 of 172,515 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115234 Jan 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Dogen... Your insecurity is transparent. I have obviously assaulted your atheistic religion, and I understand your pathetic attempts to justify your amoral worldview with science.

Sorry, you have flung hollow assertions into the night.

BTW, I am not an atheist. I have my picture in my church directory and everything.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#115235 Jan 25, 2013
Adam and Steve wrote:
<quoted text>2 questions: 1)Are we alone in the universe? and 2)Is the God/Jesus story true or a fable?

1. maybe
2. yes.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#115236 Jan 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>I see you've been logging on to that worthless atheist website talkorigins. Every one of those "29+ evidences" has been soundly debunked, so my advice to you is to stop blindly parroting whatever BS you read on the Internet. Please tell me how any form of life could survive a minimum of hundreds of years on a comet. You've ASSUMED that abiogenesis occurred, but have no science to back it up. That's RELIGION.
TalkOrigins is no more "atheistic" than a site that describes how a ball falls or what happens in a collision is atheistic. Actually what that site would be is a physic site. Nor is it any more "atheistic" than a site that describes equilibria and the pH of an acid. That site would be a chemistry site. So why pick on a site that describes how life evolved?
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#115237 Jan 25, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Evolutionist scientists like congress, lie their asses off for grants and their paychecks.
Will ask again
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Jim, what exactly is the purpose of your posts?
It obviously isn't to further the scientific knowledge of mankind - or you would submit your 'new science' to the relevant publications.
It obviously isn't to engage in any discourse as you never respond to any questions about your 'new science'
It obviously isn't to endear yourself - as your homophobic and anti-semetic rants have burned that bridge.
You could learn something (I know I have) from reading and engaging with posters (even if you disagree with them)- but you don't.
So what exactly are you trying to achieve?
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#115238 Jan 25, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
TalkOrigins is no more "atheistic" than a site that describes how a ball falls or what happens in a collision is atheistic. Actually what that site would be is a physic site. Nor is it any more "atheistic" than a site that describes equilibria and the pH of an acid. That site would be a chemistry site. So why pick on a site that describes how life evolved?
Good question, though I suspect you know the answer - basically

Evolution takes LOTS of time

Those whom Interpret the genesis account literally believe the earth has only been here for 6000 years

Hence HAVE to reject evolution.

Simple really, wrong, but simple
Anonymous

Phnom Penh, Cambodia

#115239 Jan 25, 2013
just keep telling them it was all done in 7 days,

yeah ;)
www.clubvegas999.com
One way or another

United States

#115240 Jan 25, 2013
Without hard evidence, there is no science. Evolution offers no hard science.
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#115242 Jan 25, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Without hard evidence, there is no science. Evolution offers no hard science.
And the hard science your you pet psychology was ???

Or your bacteria are intelligent argument

Or your capitalism is the same as communism argument

Or your spin = gravity argument

Or your sulphur metabolizing = sulphar based argument

Don't worry - your absense of a response Is response enough - just keep posting your nonsense and refusing to defend it.
Adam and Steve

Kansas City, MO

#115243 Jan 25, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
1) probably not
2) can't be proved either way, but as there is no evidence to support it - can replace 'God/Jesus' with Flying Spaghetti Monster and ask the same question.
For #1 we got a "Maybe" and a "Probable not". Nice. The question was, "Are we alone in the universe?" There is hope for the human race. In primitive terms humans still believe in the God theory. Going forward, humans are at a fast pace to search for and make contact with an advanced civilization. We have seen things most humans would never talk about. Those advanced being they are searching for will never make contact with humaniods.......Wait, they already do. They study and control the human animal. Its scary but true.
One way or another

United States

#115244 Jan 25, 2013
lalin 168 wrote:
just keep telling them it was all done in 7 days,
yeah ;)
www.clubvegas999.com
Purely from a scientific standpoint, prove it wasn't.
One way or another

United States

#115245 Jan 25, 2013
No one can prove old age earth by any of the theories out there.
One way or another

United States

#115246 Jan 25, 2013
Varves don't stand a chance and neither do plate tech tonics. Anything else?

Mid Atlantic mountains width

Original work
By Jim Ryan
Supported by evidence

I told you children to be aware of a game of chess. I kept you looking in one place, making you feel comfortable and getting you to do exactly what you did, thanks.

Now children, ask yourselves, how wide are the mountains at the mid Atlantic ridge? They surely aren't 67,500 miles wide
The width of the mountains should equal the movement of those plates and science claims that in one million years, the plates lose approximately 15 miles, so if the earth is 4.5 billion years old and one million divided into 4.5 billion is 4500, then multiply 15times 4500, which equals 67,500 miles of lost plate. The width of the mountains at the mid atl ridge is minuscule, so please explain how that can be, when the width of the mountain range should be, 67,500. as the mountain range is the only place that shows the addition of material.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#115247 Jan 26, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Kong, I see you've been nailed to the wall. Now you're falling prey to the classical logical fallacy of the false alternative. You cannot logically defend a scientific theory by ranting about your disbelief in God. Your personal incredulity is irrelevant to science.
Not a fallacy, there is evidence that suggest everything was done naturally, with no supernatural influence. You cannot present any evidence of your god, therefore, your god is dismissed. That's how logic works.
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#115248 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Varves don't stand a chance and neither do plate tech tonics. Anything else?
Mid Atlantic mountains width
Original work
By Jim Ryan
Supported by evidence
I told you children to be aware of a game of chess. I kept you looking in one place, making you feel comfortable and getting you to do exactly what you did, thanks.
Now children, ask yourselves, how wide are the mountains at the mid Atlantic ridge? They surely aren't 67,500 miles wide
The width of the mountains should equal the movement of those plates and science claims that in one million years, the plates lose approximately 15 miles, so if the earth is 4.5 billion years old and one million divided into 4.5 billion is 4500, then multiply 15times 4500, which equals 67,500 miles of lost plate. The width of the mountains at the mid atl ridge is minuscule, so please explain how that can be, when the width of the mountain range should be, 67,500. as the mountain range is the only place that shows the addition of material.
Jim can I suggest an improvement to your file-system?

You obviously have all of these examples stored on your PC in a word document or notepad.

Why don't you ALSO store the responses that various people have posted to show where you are wrong.

Probably best to store each of your new ideas in seperate documents - I would suggest a naming convention like the following

Nonsense_varves.doc
rebutal_varves_1.doc
rebutal_varves_2.doc
rebutal_varves_3.doc
rebutal_varves_4.doc

Nonsense_speedoflight.doc
Rebuttal_speedoflight_1.doc
Rebuttal_speedoflight_2.doc
Rebuttal_speedoflight_3.doc

And so on (you may need to purchase some more PC storage for the rebuttal docs.

You see if you adopt this filling system, BEFORE you paste you already rebuffed nonsense YET AGAIN, you can check to see if anyone has already addressed the nonsense already - and not waste your valuable time..

If you want to go the extra mile you can set up a simple database (open office is good and free) and store the nonsense and rebuttals in that - that way you can do reports such as
Most frequently posted nonsense
Most often rebutted nonsense
And so on.

Make sense jimbo?- as I say if you adopted a better organizational policy you can save a lot of time, which you could use to read a science book/take your meds

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#115249 Jan 26, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>What misconceptions and logical fallacies? You are obviously a total stranger to experimental science if you think evolution remotely qualifies as science.
The ToE is not predictive of future generations of any species, nor does it claim to be predictive. The fossil record shows us the paths that life HAS taken.

You keep pretending that the theory of evolution depends on fake principles that do not actually apply to evolution. You have yet to provide any evidence for ID.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#115250 Jan 26, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>How about four years of medical school?
It's not likely that you've even had four HOURS of medical school. You would already have presented some basic understanding of biology. All you have shown is an impotent bluff.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#115251 Jan 26, 2013
nemesis wrote:
<quoted text>Im not the one praying and talking to a ghost. Futher out there.
You seem to be fixating on goddidit as a reasonable alternative to aliens. But either way, there's no science involved.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#115252 Jan 26, 2013
Adam and Steve wrote:
<quoted text>2 questions: 1)Are we alone in the universe? and 2)Is the God/Jesus story true or a fable?
1) Another name change will not convince anyone that there are many others like you supporting the same alien conspiracy theory.

2) Maybe there are other life forms out there, maybe not. So far we have no evidence to come to any conclusion.

3) The God/Jesus story is a fable, like all current alien conspiracy fables.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#115253 Jan 26, 2013
Adam and Steve wrote:
<quoted text>2 questions: 1)Are we alone in the universe? and 2)Is the God/Jesus story true or a fable?
1 - Too early to tell.

2 - Currently not supported by evidence. Possible, but certain things like global floods, talking lizards and donkeys, and Flat Earth are fables. Unless of course magic happens to be real. But that has little to do with science.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#115254 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Evolutionist scientists like congress, lie their asses off for grants and their paychecks.
Ah, conspiracy theorists. The last resort of the ignorant people who have no evidence because they are unable to back themselves up.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr DanFromSmithville 136,256
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 2 hr Christian 202
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 2 hr Lawrence Wolf 115,227
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) 6 hr TurkanaBoy 315
Science News (Sep '13) Thu positronium 2,848
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism Aug 27 Zog Has-fallen 343
Natural Selection Not The Only Process That Dri... (Jan '14) Aug 25 reMAAT 20
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••