Should evolution be taught in high school?

Feb 24, 2008 Full story: www.scientificblogging.com 176,162

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

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117246 Feb 13, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Now I know how Jonah felt....
So you are saying that you feel mythological. Oh, if that only were true.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#117247 Feb 13, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
"Humans humans originated(sic) in Australia"?!?!?
Nooooo....
That's not what was proposed in the links I presented. I think you may want to re-read them.
Its how evolutionary biologists have interpreted the paper regarding HLA-DRB

It all there on PubMed...

Again

Not what I was talking about in MY posts

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117248 Feb 13, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Its how evolutionary biologists have interpreted the paper regarding HLA-DRB
It all there on PubMed...
Again
Not what I was talking about in MY posts
Who wants to bet that Rusty has pulled a Maz? He read the abstract of an article and did not understand it.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#117249 Feb 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Who wants to bet that Rusty has pulled a Maz? He read the abstract of an article and did not understand it.
Thanks for your valuable insights, Bud

H-E-T-E-R-O-P-L-A-S-M-Y
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#117250 Feb 13, 2013
Alien Outlaw wrote:
<quoted text>So, the Bible is proof of a God. Bones and monkey DNA proof of evolution. Than, a trillion galaxies proves that alien engineering is proof of human existence. Who made the aliens? The same ones who made God(s).
Trillion galaxies are just hydrogen and dirt
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#117251 Feb 13, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
That was over a hundred years ago, had nothing to do with Darwin and everything to do with creaturd interpretation of his work. You are lying again, why is that not surprising?
<quoted text>
Too bad I know you have no idea what you are talking about, otherwise I might be impressed. <YAWN!!>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =IjGZ6kF2gbQXX
I so regret it EVERY TIME I break my cardinal rule NEVER to watch YouTube or associated TRASH RUBBISH sites proffered by animalutionists as "evidence" to support their flimsy desperate claims

This little picture does a better job of HIGHLIGHTING the differences between chimp and human MSY....

Without the elevator music...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117252 Feb 13, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for your valuable insights, Bud
H-E-T-E-R-O-P-L-A-S-M-Y
Yes, the fool is definitely pulling a Maz.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#117253 Feb 13, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
With the starting premise of "nothing + nobody = everything", all science would be irrelevant.
There is no "starting premise" at all, chronologically. The only starting premise of science is that we can create meaningful theories from what is observed in the physical world, and this has proven to be a very powerful and useful premise to mankind.

We do not assume nothing + nobody = everything. We say...and it gets tiresome to repeat the obvious to you, but it never sinks in...we do not know. Our scientific knowledge of the world does not start from the "beginning", it starts from the most immediate and accessible observations and moves outward from there...including backward, more distant, smaller, larger, as far as the range of our observations and experiments and instruments and rational thought can take us.

Enough of this trite strawman n+n=e you keep popping out at irregular intervals. If anything, it merely shows how little you understand anything about science. But at least that would explain why you keep mistaking pseudoscience for the real thing.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#117254 Feb 13, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
I so regret it EVERY TIME I break my cardinal rule NEVER to watch YouTube or associated TRASH RUBBISH sites proffered by animalutionists as "evidence" to support their flimsy desperate claims
This little picture does a better job of HIGHLIGHTING the differences between chimp and human MSY....
Without the elevator music...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/...
This must be so embarrassing to God. You would think that after Adam, and Noah, and Babel, and Sodom, etc, God might be getting a clue as to how to bring the best humans on-side. But all He seems to attract are cowards and liars for Jesus, snivelling little dorks who think its clever to trumpet Pascal's wager, or who are afraid to even look at the counter evidence to their scriptural delusions.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#117255 Feb 14, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny ha ha
Cradling a limp SETMAR and rocking back and forth
...that's not the evidence I have been patiently seeking
Never mind
As per your immutable fanatical doctrine...
We have millions of years......
So
I'll wait

LOL. YOU seeking EVIDENCE!? As if.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#117256 Feb 14, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Notwithstanding the sudden appearance of fully formed creatures in the Cambrian WITH no ancestral fossils

Where do you get these lies????? ALL of the lifeforms of the Cambrian have ancestors in the Proterozoic (Ediacaran) period.

Read the above sentence again.

Now look it up if you need to.

That creatures appeared "fully formed" in the Cambrian with no ancestral fossils is a LIE. It is a KNOWN LIE.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text> There should have been a huge amount of diversification, first to form new species, then new genera, then new families....then new phyla...as suggested by your evo-high priest Dawkins in regards to molluscs and crustaceans

There was. That is exactly what happened.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text> Or: increasing diversity of the lower taxa --species---should preceded the disparity of the higher taxa---phyla--
Instead there is a wide disparity between the taxa and LOW species diversity
Otherwise put:
The disparity of the higher taxa---phyla---precedes the diversity of the lower taxa such as species
http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/JOURNEY/index-pal...
That's the whole point about the fossil record and the Cambrian in particular is that the phyla appear out of nowhere!

Again, a lie. It ignores the precambrian. It ignores the fact that over 99% of all species that have ever existed have gone extinct.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text> There is no record of a diversity of species becoming specialised over time into the different phyla

Another incorrect statement. Seriously, where do you get this stuff. Have you never had a real science class???
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Nested hierarchies and the like??
All of this phylogenetic 'science' is based on evolutionary assumptions

Why can't Russell learn? Nested hierarchies is not based on an assumption. Nested hierarchies are based on observations of the fossil record, of observations of living species, and is confirmed in the genetic record. Most creationists know that nested hierarchies and simply say (in some manor) goddoneit.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text> Check the literature out yourself
You get inconsistent, unreliable results because it is a bogus notion based on faulty assumptions

LOL. see above.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Mutations are NOT enough to explain the diversity in nature

LOL. Again, you creationists don't even know the mechanisms of evolution of which mutation is only one. That is very funny.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
In additions, as I have routinely said
4.5 billions years ain't enough time......

Actually, it is more than enough time. Of bigger concern to science is why evolution typically occurs as slowly as it does.\



Bottom line. You don't know anything about evolution. You are a collage of creationist misinformation and disinformation. You are afraid of real science because you know what it shows so you stay as far away from it as possible.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#117257 Feb 14, 2013
Alien Outlaw wrote:
<quoted text>Not that you don't care. Not smart enough to absorb the truth. It takes intelligence to know intelligence. Human knowledge and technology along with text books will never be sufficient enough for contact.
Which means only two things:

1 - You're an advanced alien who was dumb enough to blow his cover.

2 - You're a human who doesn't know a anything more about it than the rest of us and are therefore potentially certifiable.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#117258 Feb 14, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny ha ha
Cradling a limp SETMAR and rocking back and forth
...that's not the evidence I have been patiently seeking
Never mind
As per your immutable fanatical doctrine...
We have millions of years......
So
I'll wait
And you will. You're waiting at a bus stop waiting for the Creation bus that's been derelict for centuries.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#117259 Feb 14, 2013
Russell wrote:
I have just disputed them
And have done so before
You can dispute anything you like. Creationists dispute reality. They're incapable of addressing it though.(shrug)
Russell wrote:
Time and time again
And I am not the only one
Perhaps the least of them all
Correct. Your baseless religious opinions are irrelevant.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#117260 Feb 14, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Therefore
Darker skinned people are less evolved??
Yes?
Nope. Anyone who makes such a claim doesn't understand evolution.

Nice try at ad hom though.

And it still doesn't change the fact that the Adam and Eve story couldn't possibly be any more racist.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#117261 Feb 14, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Its how evolutionary biologists have interpreted the paper regarding HLA-DRB
It all there on PubMed...
Again
Not what I was talking about in MY posts
You're not actually talking about anything in your posts. All you're doing is pointing to research demonstrating evolution done by evolutionary biologists you disagree with using methods you think are flawed and who state that their work demonstrates evolution so you pick out a word that sounds technical therefore evolution is wrong even though you don't have an explanation.
Russell wrote:
Thanks for your valuable insights, Bud

H-E-T-E-R-O-P-L-A-S-M-Y
G-O-D-M-A-G-I-C
Russell wrote:
Trillion galaxies are just hydrogen and dirt
No, they are complex phenomena displaying high levels of CSI. Therefore everything displays high levels of CSI. Therefore you have nothing with a low CSI to provide an objective comparison. Therefore your position is non-falsifiable pseudo-scientific bullshite.
One way or another

United States

#117262 Feb 14, 2013
As always, the Evo childish clique is all talk and no proof. They've been here for years and not one of them has had a thought all their own.

Poor brainwashed children.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#117263 Feb 14, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no "starting premise" at all, chronologically. The only starting premise of science is that we can create meaningful theories from what is observed in the physical world, and this has proven to be a very powerful and useful premise to mankind.
We do not assume nothing + nobody = everything. We say...and it gets tiresome to repeat the obvious to you, but it never sinks in...we do not know. Our scientific knowledge of the world does not start from the "beginning", it starts from the most immediate and accessible observations and moves outward from there...including backward, more distant, smaller, larger, as far as the range of our observations and experiments and instruments and rational thought can take us.
Enough of this trite strawman n+n=e you keep popping out at irregular intervals. If anything, it merely shows how little you understand anything about science. But at least that would explain why you keep mistaking pseudoscience for the real thing.
And enough of this cop out "I don't know". And don't say "we" because you can't speak for anyone but yourself. Saying you have no opinion when you do is simply being dishonest.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#117264 Feb 14, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
And enough of this cop out "I don't know". And don't say "we" because you can't speak for anyone but yourself. Saying you have no opinion when you do is simply being dishonest.
On the contrary. Chim saying he/we "don't know" as it pertains to areas of science that are ambiguous at best is exceedingly honest.

For science to say definitively that "hypothesis 'A' is fact -- when this 'fact' has yet to be established, is quite dishonest.

But then again, fundimentalists -- such as yourself -- have a hard time dealing with uncertainty. It's a known trait of the highly religious personality, the "need for closure".

Overview
"... people who deal with religious contents in a literal way have a higher need for closure than people who deal with religious content in a symbolical way because they need to avoid ambiguity or are unwilling to have their beliefs confronted by alternative opinions.

Thus, apparently, whereas religious belief as such seems to be associated with a preference for order and structure as well as predictability, it is those who deal with religious content in a literal way who are incapable of dealing with alternative opinions."

https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0016732/bartdur...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#117265 Feb 14, 2013
Alien outlaw wrote:
<quoted text>A trillion galaxies in the universe. And, a bible character had nothing in creating any of it.....except in the minds of the primitive human.Who made aliens? Who made God? Proof....experience. Any pics or videos of God? Project God Book? SETI...searching for God? Evolution.....humans evolved from knuckle draggers.........Please, utilize the logic that the aliens provided. So, they left the human comprehension levels at near zero......think. Scientists know, Scientology knows and we know. Look around, humans label themselves "Experts"....really? The gullible human animal is easily brainwashed including the experts.
But, no evidence. Nobody cares about your claims. We only care about evidence. If you don't present evidence, everything you say is dismissed as the ramblings of a mad man.

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
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 5 min Dogen 525
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 23 min deutscher Nationa... 132,512
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 3 hr Brian_G 13,618
How would creationists explain... 5 hr Chimney1 318
24 hour dental emergency (Nov '13) 15 hr Zach 4
Science News (Sep '13) 21 hr positronium 2,943
Genetic entropy Thu Discord 159
More from around the web