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
114,221 - 114,240 of 172,519 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago
HTS

Williston, ND

#117280 Feb 14, 2013
appleboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The ERV's that get passed on for many generations are passed on because the immune system DOES NOT HAVE A MECHANISM to counteract their infection. The reproductive ability of any virus is affected by its negative result on the host. The more damage it does, the less ability it has to infect a new host. So the ERV's that produce neutral or positive results are likely to be the most persistent.
You missed the point. If natural selection can cull out less fit individuals, how did ERVs become incorporated in species?

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#117281 Feb 14, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Well if you don't know what a maternity ward is it's where babies are born. As a result of self-organizing DNA.
At least apparently self-organizing. It is always possible that there may be an intelligence behind the whole process.
If so then can you please provide the scientific mechanisms responsible and the evidence for them?
Thanks in advance for never bothering.
I now permit you to whine like a beeyach some more for not accepting your IDC claims at face value.
Sure, why not. Maybe billions of years ago the then-current elected president of the universe decided to do something very special for his/her/it's administration and may have signed into universal natural law the rule of From-Goo-To-You. And once the law was passed and life was initiated, other more important matters (like passing a mandatory speed for light) took the forefront. I mean heck, with a new president of the universe being elected every four years, a lot can get lost over a few billion years.
One way or another

Sarasota, FL

#117282 Feb 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You missed the point. If natural selection can cull out less fit individuals, how did ERVs become incorporated in species?
They know, but they won't address what they can't defend, but you already know that.
HTS

Williston, ND

#117283 Feb 14, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Hilda, why are you asking for evidence which you have absolutely no interest in whatsoever anyway?
How many times have I presented the evidence for evolution to you?
Lots.
How many times have you presented a rational rebuttal and not just "Nuh-UH!!!"
ZERO.
Anyway, here's some more of what you're not interested in:
http://www.trilobites.info/origins.htm
You are behaving like a spineless atheist... Posting a link that you haven't read, thinking that in so doing you will refute my argument. If you can't articulate what you believe,, don't bother attempting to set up smokescreens. There is no proof of your baseless claims.
HTS

Williston, ND

#117284 Feb 14, 2013
appleboy wrote:
<quoted text>
All cells, all organs are made from adenine, cytosine, guanine and thyimin. Different combinations produce different results. Each generation produces slight changes. One generation's cilia millions of years later is another generation's fur or hair.
Some mutations are the result of making additional copies of the same gene, and the additional copies are just as subject to mutation as the original. So what was once cilia in one generation might be teeth millions of years later in another generation. The only limit to the possibilities of novel change is the limit of what can survive to reproduce.
Storytelling is not science. Where did you come up with the ridiculous notion that cilia are ancestral to hair?
HTS

Williston, ND

#117285 Feb 14, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
How dishonest of you! I posted information with references and links and you just cut them out and stated the above.
You need to learn what you are talking about before you talk and you will not need to stoop to such deceit (or at least not as often).
like a good little DarwinBot, you posted links that you don't understand, naively believing that I'll take the bait. I'm well familiar with your tactics. Your worn out tactics don't work.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#117286 Feb 14, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You think that H2O is not a code? Is H2O water? Or is a water a combination of elements that we have arbitrarily labelled hydrogen and oxygen which we then in turn put in a more shorthand form in the code of H2O? EXACTLY the same as we did with the chemicals adenine, cytosine, guanine and thyimine as ACGT? Are they not chemicals? Are hydrogen and oxygen not also chemical elements? Do none of these react with each other via chemical processes?
Also keep in mind here that I'm not arguing against deliberate intent. You are more than free to propose an intelligent agent being responsible for any and all of these things.
It's just we've been waiting for 6 months for you to even tell us what those mechanisms are, much less provide any evidence.
Sure. Drop a nail in a lake. H20 is coded to oxidise nails.
Mugwump

UK

#117287 Feb 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You missed the point. If natural selection can cull out less fit individuals, how did ERVs become incorporated in species?
Explain how ERVs make an individual less fit
HTS

Williston, ND

#117288 Feb 14, 2013
appleboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure. Drop a nail in a lake. H20 is coded to oxidise nails.
What a load of BS.
Mugwump

UK

#117289 Feb 14, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
They know, but they won't address what they can't defend, but you already know that.
So - pet psychology - made it to the science books as you predicted yet ?

But I know, you won't address what you can't defend, but we already knew that
HTS

Williston, ND

#117290 Feb 14, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain how ERVs make an individual less fit
ERVs are supposedly worthless segments of DNA that replaced normal functional segments.
One way or another

United States

#117291 Feb 14, 2013
It seems the scientists have all kinds of excuses for the morons claiming c14 dating.

How is it they aren't smart enough to figure out how to test c14 dating, with definitive results? Because the truth doesn't sell near as good as lies.

Scientists must hate learning new things, because every lie stymies the next possible discovery.

Stupid morons

http://www.c14dating.com/corr.html

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#117292 Feb 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
What a load of pure BS. Please provide scientific proof that cambrian lifeforms had ancestors in the proterozoic period. Bedtime stories do not constitute science.
Here are some pretty pictures of precambrian life for you.
http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Paleobiology/Prec...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117293 Feb 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>ERVs are supposedly worthless segments of DNA that replaced normal functional segments.
No, ERV's are usually worthless segments of DNA. The chances that they could be utile are small but real. The fact that they are sometimes of use was discovered by .... come on ... one guess.... you can do it..

The fact that ERV's could be of use was discovered by evolutionary biologists you dolt.

And they don't replace normally functional segments. Who told you that?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#117294 Feb 14, 2013
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
Here are some pretty pictures of precambrian life for you.
http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Paleobiology/Prec...
That is evidence. Since HST is a true creatard he will either ignore it or deny it.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#117295 Feb 14, 2013
appleboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Viruses interact with the chemistry of DNA. That's how they replicate. Some viruses that infect germ cells can cause permanent changes to following generations, contributing to evolution
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Please stop dodging and answer the question. What do viruses have to do with the self organization of DNA? Evo-babbling doesn't cut it.
--------

You seem to have your own very personal meaning for "self organization" that you are reluctant to share with others. Do you have a problem with the idea that the nucleotides from the virus can add to or change the function of the genes they are affecting?
One way or another

United States

#117296 Feb 14, 2013
What I know about pet psychology I won't give away for a huge corporation to steal from me, especially since finding out that no matter if I have a patent here, any corporation can go to other countries and patent it there, undermining the price till they just put you out of business and take all your information that made the product sell in the first place.

That's why I don't give out the other info, but then the morons here just don't have anything worthwhile, you know, like a thought all their own, even after years of there childish cliques nonsense.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#117297 Feb 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>For the last time, a baby is not created by self organization of DNA. Pre-existing DNA is required. I'm asking you to point to any observation in chemistry that suggests that raw materials can spontaneously form DNA, or even come close to such an endpoint.
Whoever said that babies poofed into existence?

It is a given that we don't know what the original conditions were for the first life. The conditions that existed on earth 3.5 billion years ago can only be guessed at. We only know that those conditions no longer exist.

Could you tell us what those conditions were 3.5 billion years ago and why they could not have produced life?

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#117298 Feb 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you bother posting links that you don't understand? Do you think I'm going to be fooled? RNA cannot self-organize. If you can show me scientific proof that nucleotides can randomly self-assemble into a purposeful genetic code I'll acknowledge that I'm wrong. Until then, please dispense with your attempted smokescreens.
Whoever said that RNA "self organizes"? We don't know what the first conditions were for DNA and RNA to work together. Those conditions no longer exist. But we do know that life comes from life.

The theory of evolution does not address the origin of life. Religion DOES address the origin of life, but cannot address it using science.
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#117299 Feb 14, 2013
One way or another wrote:
What I know about pet psychology I won't give away for a huge corporation to steal from me, especially since finding out that no matter if I have a patent here, any corporation can go to other countries and patent it there, undermining the price till they just put you out of business and take all your information that made the product sell in the first place.
That's why I don't give out the other info, but then the morons here just don't have anything worthwhile, you know, like a thought all their own, even after years of there childish cliques nonsense.
So it was a commercial decision to not release your findings and therefore continue the mental suffering of pets all around the world.

It's people like you thank support a fully corrupt congress with your selfishness.

Bazinga !!

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
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 1 hr Christian 205
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr deutscher Nationa... 115,235
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr Dogen 136,264
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) 15 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

•••