Should evolution be taught in high school?

Feb 24, 2008 Full story: www.scientificblogging.com 174,458

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." Full Story
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#115256 Jan 26, 2013
Adam and Steve wrote:
<quoted text>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.
We still don't give a crud about your little green/grey men.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#115257 Jan 26, 2013
appleboy wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
And it's the same one he's been making for years. It ain't the first time HTS has shown up on these forums. We already know he's a lying sack.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#115258 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Without hard evidence, there is no science. Evolution offers no hard science.
Endogenous Retroviruses
One way or another

United States

#115259 Jan 26, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Endogenous Retroviruses
Can you debate this subject fully?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#115260 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you debate this subject fully?
It depends... Can you read?

From: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/secti...

Endogenous retroviruses provide yet another example of molecular sequence evidence for universal common descent. Endogenous retroviruses are molecular remnants of a past parasitic viral infection. Occasionally, copies of a retrovirus genome are found in its host's genome, and these retroviral gene copies are called endogenous retroviral sequences. Retroviruses (like the AIDS virus or HTLV1, which causes a form of leukemia) make a DNA copy of their own viral genome and insert it into their host's genome. If this happens to a germ line cell (i.e. the sperm or egg cells) the retroviral DNA will be inherited by descendants of the host. Again, this process is rare and fairly random, so finding retrogenes in identical chromosomal positions of two different species indicates common ancestry.
One way or another

United States

#115261 Jan 26, 2013
Does anyone here think they can argue Endogenous Retroviruses?
One way or another

United States

#115262 Jan 26, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
It depends... Can you read?
From: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/secti...
Endogenous retroviruses provide yet another example of molecular sequence evidence for universal common descent. Endogenous retroviruses are molecular remnants of a past parasitic viral infection. Occasionally, copies of a retrovirus genome are found in its host's genome, and these retroviral gene copies are called endogenous retroviral sequences. Retroviruses (like the AIDS virus or HTLV1, which causes a form of leukemia) make a DNA copy of their own viral genome and insert it into their host's genome. If this happens to a germ line cell (i.e. the sperm or egg cells) the retroviral DNA will be inherited by descendants of the host. Again, this process is rare and fairly random, so finding retrogenes in identical chromosomal positions of two different species indicates common ancestry.
So, does it come via sperm or egg line and show proof.
Next
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#115263 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Does anyone here think they can argue Endogenous Retroviruses?
Jimbo - everyone realises that discussing ERVs (or anything) with you is pointless,you either ignore people's posts or call them morons.

But lets see if someone less cynical than me wants to give it a go.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#115264 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
So, does it come via sperm or egg line and show proof.
Next
Both!! Do your own freaking reading.
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#115265 Jan 26, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Both!! Do your own freaking reading.
As I said above - he rarely reads other people's posts - much less comprehends them.

But good luck - maybe will have more luck than most.

Thought wager you won't - as always take dollars, Stirling at a pinch - no euros

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#115266 Jan 26, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
As I said above - he rarely reads other people's posts - much less comprehends them.
But good luck - maybe will have more luck than most.
Thought wager you won't - as always take dollars, Stirling at a pinch - no euros
I'll pass on that bet ... thus the minimal investment in my response to him.
One way or another

United States

#115267 Jan 26, 2013
I've read for about 30 minutes on this subject, just long enough know that this subject crosses quite a few boundaries in medicine and much of the work is supposition.

The main reason, is because it is a hypothesis.
It doesn't even rate --to be called a theory.

You obviously can't read and comprehend.
One way or another

United States

#115268 Jan 26, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Both!! Do your own freaking reading.
It is not both and the scientists don't know which. It's a hypothesis, nothing more.

Go back to your sandbox.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#115269 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not both and the scientists don't know which. It's a hypothesis, nothing more.
Go back to your sandbox.
It is both, the infection occurs in germ cells before they are either sperm or egg. There is no guessing here, there is statistics and probabilities, which is NOT the same thing.

There is a certain probability that all the molecules in a glass of water will all jump in the same direction rendering the top steam and the bottom ice. But the statistical probability of this is so small it likely has never occurred anywhere at anytime in the life of the universe. But you would say that's just a guess because you are a dumb butt.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#115270 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
So, does it come via sperm or egg line and show proof.
Next
No problem. We have a number of them in orthologous positions in all the great apes - humans, chimps, gorillas, orangutans. Each sharing slightly less as we go along, so we share the most with chimps, slightly less with gorillas, and again slightly less with orangs. Meaning the pattern of shared ERV's match nested hierarchies. Since ERV's are originally the result of retro-viruses there is no reason they should fall into nested hierarchies. In fact it would be EXCEEDINGLY unlikely, since retroviruses insert themselves at random positions in the genome. If they attack anywhere in the host OTHER than along the germ line (sperm or egg) the mutation caused by ERV's will NOT be passed on to any offspring.

There, that was easy wasn't it?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#115271 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
I've read for about 30 minutes on this subject, just long enough know that this subject crosses quite a few boundaries in medicine and much of the work is supposition.
The main reason, is because it is a hypothesis.
It doesn't even rate --to be called a theory.
You obviously can't read and comprehend.
Yes, it's a hypothesis. Which is part and parcel of the theory of evolution. Scientific theories are comprised of multiple hypotheses, which are then tested. All combine to form a working scientific model. The hypothesis re ERV's is just one of them.

But then, if I recall you have trouble understanding what "theory" means in a scientific context anyway, so uh...(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#115272 Jan 26, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
It is both, the infection occurs in germ cells before they are either sperm or egg. There is no guessing here, there is statistics and probabilities, which is NOT the same thing.
There is a certain probability that all the molecules in a glass of water will all jump in the same direction rendering the top steam and the bottom ice. But the statistical probability of this is so small it likely has never occurred anywhere at anytime in the life of the universe. But you would say that's just a guess because you are a dumb butt.
We can provide them with the probabilities too, based on observed evidence. Retro-viruses attack the genome *pretty much* randomly. However they DO have a tendency to attack some places more than others. We can call these areas "comfort zones" if you like. But these are still spread along half of the 3 billion-base genome. Half of 3 billion is 1.5 billion.

This means the chances of us sharing just ONE of the same ERV sequences at an orthologous position with chimps (ignoring the other great apes for now) is just one in 1.5 billion. Therefore the chances of us sharing two is one in 2.25 quintillion. And so on and so forth for each subsequent shared ERV marker. Not sure what the total amount of shared ERV's is, but we share LOTS.

And this is the reason why ERV's are considered such strong evidence of common ancestry.
One way or another

United States

#115273 Jan 26, 2013
Endogenous retroviruses are a hypothesis, it doesn't even rate being called a theory. You can try to argue what you will never understand, but hey, that's what you morons do.
One way or another

United States

#115274 Jan 26, 2013
The theory of evolution is just a way to strip power from religion, without government morons looking like they are the ones proffering the attack.
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#115275 Jan 26, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not both and the scientists don't know which. It's a hypothesis, nothing more.
Go back to your sandbox.
Jim - when the link says

'If this happens to a germ line cell (i.e. the sperm or egg cells)'

It means EITHER the sperm or the egg - as that's what 'the germ line' means.

Now I apologise that the scientific community doesn't make this clear, but , like those deceitful people who conspired to hide the fact that volcanic eruptions are NOT a common occurrence - they presume that their readership is sane.

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
Bobby Jindal: "I'm Not an Evolutionary Biologist" 22 min Chimney1 375
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Agents of Corruption 120,898
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism 1 hr Chimney1 711
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr Chimney1 138,183
Darwin on the rocks 16 hr The Dude 358
Monkey VS Man Sun Bluenose 14
Charles Darwin's credentials and Evolution Oct 19 TurkanaBoy 204

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE