Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 179702 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.

Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#116690 Feb 10, 2013
Above should read '.... Rational approach to science'

Really need to proof read before I post - apologies
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#116691 Feb 10, 2013
How about another un-real scientist?

And trust me there are many...

Ann Gauger

is a senior research scientist at Biologic Institute. Her work uses molecular genetics and genomic engineering to study the origin, organization and operation of metabolic pathways. She received a BS in biology from MIT, and a PhD in developmental biology from the University of Washington, where she studied cell adhesion molecules involved in Drosophila embryogenesis. As a post-doctoral fellow at Harvard she cloned and characterized the Drosophila kinesin light chain. Her research has been published in Nature, Development, and the Journal of Biological Chemistry.

Totally un-real since she believes there is evidence of design in nature

CREATION/DESIGN RACISM

By the way, it was Dr Gauger's framework that I used heavily in my posts about HLA-DRB1

http://www.amazon.com/Science-Human-Origins-A...

But there are on-line versions of this book
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#116692 Feb 10, 2013
Another un-real scientist

Dr John Hartnett
Physics, Cosmology (Australia)

Biography
John G. Hartnett received both his B.Sc.(hons) and his Ph.D. with distinction from the Department of Physics at the University of Western Australia (UWA). He works with the Frequency Standards and Metrology research group, holding the rank of tenured Research Professor (the equivalent of Reader in the UK, would be Full Professor in the USA). See John’s university web page.

John’s research interests include the development of ultra-stable cryogenically cooled microwave oscillators based on a sapphire crystal, ultra low-noise radar, tests of fundamental theories of physics such as Special and General Relativity and measurement of drift in fundamental constants and their cosmological implications.

John has a keen interest in cosmology and how it applies to the creationist world-view. He is also developing new physics that has established that there is no need to assume the existence of dark matter in the universe. He has published more than 150 papers in scientific journals.

Awards
Dr Hartnett was announced as the winner of the 2010 W.G. Cady award by IEEE Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control Society.

The W.G. Cady Award recognizes outstanding contributions in the fields of piezoelectric or other classical frequency control, selection and measurement and resonant sensor devices.

The citation reads:“for the construction of ultra-stable cryogenic sapphire dielectric resonator oscillators and promotion of their applications in the fields of frequency metrology and radio-astronomy.”

The award was presented during the 2010 IEEE International Frequency Control Symposium at Newport Beach, California in June.

I met him last month and he said he is moving to Adelaide

How ironic that he may be occupying the same chair at Adelaide University as Paul Davies....

Ha ha ha

But John is quite obviously a stark raving lunatic since he is a creationist and believes God created in 6 normal length days
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#116693 Feb 10, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
Above should read '.... Rational approach to science'
Really need to proof read before I post - apologies
You're too polite Mugwump

Its rather refreshing

But this is a debate

Why aren't you more cut throat?
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#116694 Feb 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
You're too polite Mugwump
Its rather refreshing
But this is a debate
Why aren't you more cut throat?
I'm British - we get forcibly expelled from these shores if we don't adhere to the highest standards of good manners.

Got it f&@kwit ?

Damm , who is that knocking at the door this time of night.

:-)
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#116695 Feb 10, 2013
More un-real scientists

Dr Peter Line

Peter Line’s undergraduate major was in biophysics. After that he completed a Masters Degree and a Ph.D., both in the area of neuroscience. He has had a keen interest in the creation/evolution issue ever since becoming a Christian, as evolution was a stumbling block to him believing God’s Word was true.

http://creation.com/mind-by-design-peter-line...

Articles
Australopithecus sediba revisited
‘Giants’ in the land: an assessment of Gigantopithecus and Meganthropus
New study claims Hobbit was a new species
Fossil evidence for alleged apemen—Part 1: the genus Homo
Fossil evidence for alleged apemen—Part 2: non-Homo hominids
Progressive creationist anthropology: many reasons NOT to believe (A review of Who was Adam? by Fazale Rana with Hugh Ross (2005))
Australopithecus sediba—no human ancestor
Gautengensis vs sediba: A battle for supremacy amongst ‘apeman’ contenders, but neither descended from Adam
He ain’t my brother: no apparent family ties between Big Man and Lucy
See also an interview with Dr Line in Creation magazine, Mind by Design.

Naturally, despite being employed by an Australian University....

Is a.....?

CREATION RACISM
bothside

Kansas City, MO

#116696 Feb 10, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm British - we get forcibly expelled from these shores if we don't adhere to the highest standards of good manners.
Got it f&@kwit ?
Damm , who is that knocking at the door this time of night.
:-)
Thats the police coming to take your methadone away.........
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#116697 Feb 10, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm British - we get forcibly expelled from these shores if we don't adhere to the highest standards of good manners.
Got it f&@kwit ?
Damm , who is that knocking at the door this time of night.
:-)
Well done Mugwump.....otherwise.....

There's a risk...

Strong risk.....

I am trying...not...to

Because I too like good manners...

But sinful nature and all....

Mug....wimp...

No No No
I shouldn't have

Where's my whip for self flagellation?

Oh yes
I remember now..

I don't have one
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#116698 Feb 10, 2013
bothside wrote:
<quoted text>Thats the police coming to take your methadone away.........
The police usually beg doctors to put people on methadone...

But what would I know
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#116699 Feb 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
More un-real scientists
Dr Peter Line
Peter Line’s undergraduate major was in biophysics. After that he completed a Masters Degree and a Ph.D., both in the area of neuroscience. He has had a keen interest in the creation/evolution issue ever since becoming a Christian, as evolution was a stumbling block to him believing God’s Word was true.
http://creation.com/mind-by-design-peter-line...
Articles
Australopithecus sediba revisited
‘Giants’ in the land: an assessment of Gigantopithecus and Meganthropus
New study claims Hobbit was a new species
Fossil evidence for alleged apemen—Part 1: the genus Homo
Fossil evidence for alleged apemen—Part 2: non-Homo hominids
Progressive creationist anthropology: many reasons NOT to believe (A review of Who was Adam? by Fazale Rana with Hugh Ross (2005))
Australopithecus sediba—no human ancestor
Gautengensis vs sediba: A battle for supremacy amongst ‘apeman’ contenders, but neither descended from Adam
He ain’t my brother: no apparent family ties between Big Man and Lucy
See also an interview with Dr Line in Creation magazine, Mind by Design.
Naturally, despite being employed by an Australian University....
Is a.....?
CREATION RACISM
Again you quote creation.com

Their religious beliefs aside - do you think they can be scientifically objective when they admit they will dismiss ALL EVIDENCE that contradicts the scripture without evaluating the evidence?

Simple question - would appreciate your thoughts
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#116700 Feb 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Well done Mugwump.....otherwise.....
There's a risk...
Strong risk.....
I am trying...not...to
Because I too like good manners...
But sinful nature and all....
Mug....wimp...
No No No
I shouldn't have
Where's my whip for self flagellation?
Oh yes
I remember now..
I don't have one
Well I could say ...

Russ sells out any objectivity with respect to science due to his religious beliefs

But I wouldn't be that immature, obviously
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#116701 Feb 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
But John is quite obviously a stark raving lunatic since he is a creationist and believes God created in 6 normal length days
Don't you know that all conclusions depend on presuppositions?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#116702 Feb 10, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Must admit - I only know the 'basics' of physics as found it a bit dry (sorry) and concentrated on biology and chemistry up to degree level.
I say this not in an attempt at humility (though being British is hard to fight off the urge - and queuing - we are ALL about the queuing)
But to point out that I don't comment as I am not au fait enough with the subject.
Can you see the point I am making here ?

Something about biscuits and tea, right?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#116703 Feb 10, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Geeze moron, einsteinium cosmological constant described a static universe. Since you're too stupid to understand, static has NO force moron.
Get a brain moron.

This would be hysterical if you were not serious.

Not that you will read this and certainly not that you would understand it if you did, but....

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

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#116704 Feb 10, 2013
One way or another wrote:
You morons were claiming that red shift proved an expanding universe. You morons change faster than the wind.

It does prove an expanding universe. But red shift is not something that needs to be proved. It is an observation of a Doppler shift toward the long (red) end of the spectrum due to motion away from the observer.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#116705 Feb 10, 2013
One way or another wrote:
To all you morons with shit for brains, static is not static electricity. Lol

No, but static electricity is static.

Static electricity is so called because it is not in motion.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#116706 Feb 10, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Yoo hoo, morons,-- static 1. pertaining to or characterized by a fixed or stationary condition.
2. showing little or no change: a static concept; a static relationship.
3. lacking movement, development, or vitality: The novel was marred by static characterizations, especially in its central figures.

We know what it means. It is you who seemed lost.

And definition #2 is the one that is applicable to the CC

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#116707 Feb 10, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Hey Evo morons, which scientist wrote the following on the web site,--http://universalium.aca demic.ru/97635/cosmological_co nstant
Astron.
a term introduced by Einstein into his field equations of general relativity to permit a stationary, nonexpanding universe: it has since been abandoned in most models of the universe. Cf. Einstein model.
[1925-30]
***
Term reluctantly added by Albert Einstein to his equations of general relativity in order to obtain a solution to the equations that described a static universe, as he believed it to be at the time.
The constant has the effect of a repulsive force that acts against the gravitational attraction of matter in the universe. When Einstein heard of the evidence that the universe is expanding, he called the introduction of the cosmological constant the "biggest blunder" of his life. Recent developments suggest that in the early universe there may well have been a cosmological constant with a nonzero value.
***
Which scientists confirmed this shit?

Google "dark energy"

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

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#116708 Feb 10, 2013
One way or another wrote:
I don't bother with the most deceitful idiots, but then all you Evo morons prove just how stupid you choose to be.

It is not our fault that you don't even try to understand.

That is on you, buddy.
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#116709 Feb 10, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but static electricity is static.
Static electricity is so called because it is not in motion.
You do know that I threw that in for a joke?

But shows Jimbos selective responses to critisms

Read on MacDuff

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) 1 min Bob of Quantum-Faith 43,324
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 min The Northener 205,208
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 16 min Bob of Quantum-Faith 18,594
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 9 hr ChristineM 917
Questions about first life 12 hr Upright Scientist 18
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 12 hr Dogen 151,492
Carbon and isotopic dating are a lie Sat One way or another 16
More from around the web