Should evolution be taught in high school?

[Dogen]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>What a load of BS. You can't provide any evidence as to how evolution producd the transcription/translation process. What you all science is nothing more than religion.

Even if correct (and it isn't) it is not necessary for a theory to explain everything to be a valid theory. Where science ignorant creationists like yourself come up with this notion I have no idea.

None of the theories of gravity explain everything that is observed. But still things fall to the ground.

There is no information that falsifies evolution.

[Dogen]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>More aimless evo-babbling. When you have actual scientific evidence, I'll acknowledge it. To this point, you have produced nothing.

Thank for the support of what I said.

I would accept your implicit resignation but I happen to enjoy bashing baby seals.


Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Still nothing, eh? You are resigned to not even trying anymore. You know you have nothing. I know you have nothing. Everyone here knows you have nothing.
You are too chicken to even TRY to respond.
Here it is again. Let me know if you get up the nerve.
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
No, your not. You just want a forum to spew your value based opinions. You are not interested in facts, nor data and especially not science. You have demonstrated that you are not acquainted with the scientific method and that you love to build and bash straw men.
The science, if you were really interested, is out there. But instead of looking for and at it you have filled your head with silly, religious based, ideas from common creationist (pseudoscience) sites. If that is what you wish to do with your brain then by all means. But don't pretend to us that you have a clue as to what science really says because you have not the first clue.

[HTS]

Ooogah Boogah wrote:

<quoted text>
The proven existence of a potential designer would be a darned good start. I'll wait ...

The existence of specified complexity is self evident proof of a designer. Why don't you demand proof that DNA can self organize? We're is your scientific evidence that such a "force" exists?

[Dogen]

Urban Cowboy wrote:

<quoted text>
You see what I mean? He's just going to say that over and over.

Sorry about pointing out the facts. I know how you hate facts.

You want to get your butt kicked some more? Fine. Just make another unfounded creationist assertion. I will refute it as usual.

I think what frustrated you the most is when I demonstrated that you don't even know your own religion.

[HTS]

Dogen wrote:

<quoted text>
Even if correct (and it isn't) it is not necessary for a theory to explain everything to be a valid theory. Where science ignorant creationists like yourself come up with this notion I have no idea.
None of the theories of gravity explain everything that is observed. But still things fall to the ground.
There is no information that falsifies evolution.

If you were intellectually honest, you would acknowledge that science cannot explain ANY aspect of the origin of species. All you have are imaginative conjectures. Your magic formula is:
Mutations + natural selection + time = any complexity. That hypothesis has never been proven... Not even one micro-step.

[Dogen]

Urban Cowboy wrote:

<quoted text>
What would you accept as evidence of design? Specifically the things I mentioned? What criteria fails? What passes?

How about something that does not fail the test of falsification?

Remember IC (Irreducible complexity)? That would have been evidence of design, but every suggestion of IC failed. Serious IDers (Yes, I know that is an oxymoron) don't bring up IC anymore because they got crushed badly.

Also, does it past basic scientific method issues?

Is it testable?
Can the tests be reproducible?
Is if falsifiable (but not falsified)?
Is it measurable (empirical)?
Can it be formulated?
Is it objective?
Is it parsimonious (within reason)?
And (this is key) can you make successful predictions!?

[Ooogah Boogah]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>The existence of specified complexity is self evident proof of a designer. Why don't you demand proof that DNA can self organize? We're is your scientific evidence that such a "force" exists?

Viruses are "non-living" organic matter that interact with living DNA. There ya go!!!

[Dogen]

Urban Cowboy wrote:

<quoted text>
Biology is not an entertaining magic show. The ATP synthase motor can be observed and analyzed and disected and studied as can the DNA molecule. Now answer the damn question.

You miss the point. Criss Angel's show can also be observed, analyzed, dissected and studied. And when you do so the magic is lost. In just the same way religious based (and biased) pseudoscience can be demystified.

[Ooogah Boogah]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>The existence of specified complexity is self evident proof of a designer. Why don't you demand proof that DNA can self organize? We're is your scientific evidence that such a "force" exists?

Where is this proof demonstrated? That is quite a claim. Please show this proof that "The existence of specified complexity is self evident proof of a designer." Please note that to have such a proof you will also have to produce this designer. Otherwise, you've got nothing ... again.

[Dogen]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>The existence of specified complexity is self evident proof of a designer. Why don't you demand proof that DNA can self organize? We're is your scientific evidence that such a "force" exists?

Since "complexity" is a relative term that has no absolute meaning (like tall or heavy or hot) ones perception that it is present does not mean anything and is not proof of anything.

DNA self organizes every day. It is called "chemistry". I think you referring how it formed originally (hard to say as your language is not very specific). As to proof of DNA's natural origin we know the the parts that make it up (nucleotides) form naturally. And the things that form nucleotides also form naturally. Even RNA (an apparent DNA precursor) has been shown to be naturally forming.

I hope that answers your question, but it will likely just tick you off that the answer is that obvious.

[Dogen]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>If you were intellectually honest, you would acknowledge that science cannot explain ANY aspect of the origin of species. All you have are imaginative conjectures. Your magic formula is:
Mutations + natural selection + time = any complexity. That hypothesis has never been proven... Not even one micro-step.

This is all false. All you need to do is look this stuff up. The fact that you won't indicates that you have lost faith in your own religion. You don't even seem to know the mechanisms of evolution (you have 2 of them, where are the rest).

The rest of your post is your usual collection of fallacies,(straw-man, Ad hominem, Argument from Incredulity,....).

[Godlust]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>The existence of specified complexity is self evident proof of a designer. Why don't you demand proof that DNA can self organize? We're is your scientific evidence that such a "force" exists?

Lets make this as simple as humanly possible......On one side is creation and the other side is evolution both are unanimously false, without question. Human thought of today is no different than humans 1000 years ago. Stuck in a mind rut, sinking hopelessly into an eternity of unbelieveable brainwashing. Only two wrong choices and one right one........Advanced Aliens engineered the human animal and all life on earth. Proof....about as much proof as God exist.

[Russell]

Godlust wrote:

<quoted text>Lets make this as simple as humanly possible......On one side is creation and the other side is evolution both are unanimously false, without question. Human thought of today is no different than humans 1000 years ago. Stuck in a mind rut, sinking hopelessly into an eternity of unbelieveable brainwashing. Only two wrong choices and one right one........Advanced Aliens engineered the human animal and all life on earth. Proof....about as much proof as God exist.

Who made the aliens?

[One way or another]

Russell wrote:

<quoted text>
Who made the aliens?

If he had a brain, he might have asked himself that question. Oh well.

[Kong_]

Godlust wrote:

<quoted text>Lets make this as simple as humanly possible......On one side is creation and the other side is evolution both are unanimously false, without question. Human thought of today is no different than humans 1000 years ago. Stuck in a mind rut, sinking hopelessly into an eternity of unbelieveable brainwashing. Only two wrong choices and one right one........Advanced Aliens engineered the human animal and all life on earth. Proof....about as much proof as God exist.

http://www.myfacewhen.net/view/1186-alrighty-...

[HTS]

Dogen wrote:

<quoted text>
Since "complexity" is a relative term that has no absolute meaning (like tall or heavy or hot) ones perception that it is present does not mean anything and is not proof of anything.
DNA self organizes every day. It is called "chemistry". I think you referring how it formed originally (hard to say as your language is not very specific). As to proof of DNA's natural origin we know the the parts that make it up (nucleotides) form naturally. And the things that form nucleotides also form naturally. Even RNA (an apparent DNA precursor) has been shown to be naturally forming.
I hope that answers your question, but it will likely just tick you off that the answer is that obvious.

DNA does not "self organize" every day. It always requires pre-existing DNA. As far as nucleotides forming naturally... What does that prove? I'm asking you for a logical explanation as to how DNA could form on its own. A racemic hodgepodge of nucleotides is not a genetic code. How did the first genetic information capable of supporting self replicating life come into existence? As far as RNA being a DNA precursor... That's raw conjecture. You have only dodged the question.

[HTS]

Ooogah Boogah wrote:

<quoted text>
Viruses are "non-living" organic matter that interact with living DNA. There ya go!!!

Your base ignorance of biology is embarrassing.

[HTS]

Dogen wrote:

<quoted text>
This is all false. All you need to do is look this stuff up. The fact that you won't indicates that you have lost faith in your own religion. You don't even seem to know the mechanisms of evolution (you have 2 of them, where are the rest).
The rest of your post is your usual collection of fallacies,(straw-man, Ad hominem, Argument from Incredulity,....).

I've heard all of your debunked recycled arguments. Your incessant parroting of the same stale rhetoric is pointless. You can continue to live in the dark ages and dutifully cling to the primitive thinking of nineteenth century biologists and ignore the facts of molecular biology. Every proposed mechanism of evolutionary transmutation is biologically impossible. If you think humans and apes are related, then try selective breeding on a chimpanzee and see how far you can get. If that's too big of a challenge, try bacteria. You can culture trillions of trillions of organisms in short periods of time. No one has ever produced any evolution.

[HTS]

Dogen wrote:

<quoted text>
Since "complexity" is a relative term that has no absolute meaning (like tall or heavy or hot) ones perception that it is present does not mean anything and is not proof of anything.
.

Typical atheist BS. Your relativistic worldview requires you to pervert mathematical concepts or order and complexity to justify your religion.

[Ooogah Boogah]

HTS wrote:

<quoted text>Your base ignorance of biology is embarrassing.

I nailed it and you can't stand it.