Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 178661 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.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119430 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
C’mon Richard
How intelligent does one has to be to deflate evolutionary hot air?
<quoted text>
Sayeth the greatest creation bigot that flounces around this forum


Again, you failed to address the issues and tried to get by with a hand wave, a denial, and an ad hominum.

We want science.

We want logic.

We don't want you to pretend to play a game that you don't have the resources to cover.



The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Because there are no intelligent creationists.

C’mon Richard
How intelligent does one has to be to deflate evolutionary hot air?

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
More projection. Especially the bit about amorality, considering the fact that you're incapable of any kind of genuine morality and whose position is profoundly racist.

Sayeth the greatest creation bigot that flounces around this forum

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119431 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
So what has been observed is DNA sitting in it’s God given domain...the nucleus...?
And that helps the evo-tard cause...how?
Did you not say: since we have observed DNA forming...or words to that effect...?

Another failure.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119432 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
It is SPECIFIED PURPOSEFUL complexity
Does gold replicate itself?

There is no such thing.

Crystals can self replicate. Are they alive?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119433 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
More anaemic bleatings from the ignorant masses.....
Another “copy cat” religion slur....
Solomon was right
There is nothing new under the sun
Please see for a scholarly refutation of your claim:
http://christianthinktank.com/copycat.html
**Warning**
Not for the faint hearted

It is just a bunch of philosophical argumentation.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

#119434 Feb 24, 2013
Evolutionists should ask themselves: What is the basic mechanism for their macro changes? Must be beneficial mutations right? Now, ask the following:

How often do we observe beneficial mutations? Never!

How often do we observe harmful mutations? Always!

So how can they accept a theory that depends entirely on something that has never been observed and is prevented from what is always observed?

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#119435 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Evidence that are ancestors were apes?
Any evidence?
http://www.sciencephoto.com/image/171012/larg...

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119436 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for finally admitting your position
It’s what I suspected....all along
Here’s what your high priest thinks of you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =BAbpfn9QgGAXX


I don't accept priests.

My position has been consistent and in the public domain for a long time. It is based on the known facts which you are powerless to try to refute.

To reiterate; "More to the point it demonstrates evolution to be an established and observable fact, which was my point to start with."


Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, but I am not worried about that. The bible was falsified (as a literal source) long before me. The whole fundamentalist movement is an attempt to hide what people have known for at least hundreds of years. The bible is not literal.
More to the point it demonstrates evolution to be an established and observable fact, which was my point to start with.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#119437 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing.
Crystals can self replicate. Are they alive?
Specified
Purposeful

What purpose has crystal replication?

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

#119438 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
The improved fitness was observed. Even you admit that. How else did they recover fitness? In fact according to Sanford it was impossible for them to recover fitness. When they did so they busted Sanford's unsupported false hypothesis.
Sanford's first fail was to avoid peer review. That immediately show set off alarms, especially since Sanford has passed peer review in the past. Second he had no evidence that supported his claim. Now you should be hearing a very large AaaOOO-Ga every second or so. Third an experiment that tested his WAG failed.
That is three strikes and he is out. If Sanford wants to have any credibility he has to show what was wrong with the experiment and come up with a test himself. That will not be happening soon since Sanford knew he was wrong before he published his book. That is why he took the route that he did.
He is on a new route today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =0fu61waxpHEXX
Not according to Sanford. Sanford never said that. The article simply makes a unwarranted, speculative claim with no evidence at all. The article did not refute Sanford in any way.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#119439 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
It is just a bunch of philosophical argumentation.
Somewhat like your brand of christianity...

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119440 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Er....
A BELIEF in Jesus would preclude belief in evo-rantings....

False. Clearly your theology is limited by your small brain.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Whatever happened to the evolutionary tree of life?

It refuted creationism
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow
Jesus believed in a ‘young’ creation
He would HAVE to know as He was there

There is no indication as to what Jesus believed about creation.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text> You have massacred the Bible to justify your compromise
This is precisely what brings discredit to Christianity and to the Lord

You do not know enough about the history of the bible and of early Christianity for me to have a reasonable discussion about this issue with you.

Russell wrote:
<quoted text> The useful idiots that have deluded themselves thinking the lie evolution has any relevance or meaning in science or life

I see, so Scientific fact = delusion. Great. we can all go back to living in caves now.

Evolutionary biology (Evolutionary Medicine) is giving us a fighting chance against diseases like AIDS, cancer, influenza...

You want people to go back to dying gruesome deaths. No thanks. I will stick with science. You can find your own cave.


Your beliefs are just beliefs. They are not based on actual science. Yet I bet you enjoy the benefits that science has given us in the modern world. heck, I bet you even own a computer. Hypocrite.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#119441 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, you failed to address the issues and tried to get by with a hand wave, a denial, and an ad hominum.
We want science.
We want logic.
We don't want you to pretend to play a game that you don't have the resources to cover.
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Because there are no intelligent creationists.
C’mon Richard
How intelligent does one has to be to deflate evolutionary hot air?
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
More projection. Especially the bit about amorality, considering the fact that you're incapable of any kind of genuine morality and whose position is profoundly racist.
Sayeth the greatest creation bigot that flounces around this forum
Rather gallant of you to race to The Dude's defense

But then do try and DEFEND him

I know you want science....its badly needed in evolutionism...in fact
Its one of those tragically missing items in the desperate attempts to MAKE evolution science

You want logic....correct
You have none

What you need is rational thought...

About your version of christianity...

It's quite unsustainable

But in the dual religious beliefs of evolution and your peculiar doctrine

I think rationality was a very early casualty...
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#119442 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
???
There are transitional fossils in the fossil record. There are lots of transitional fossils in the fossil record.
Are you regurgitating the old creationist canard about there being no transitional fossils?
Actually one can consider all fossils to be transitional (except for the most recent ones which have no ancestors in the fossil record.....yet!).
Blind faith

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

#119443 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Somewhat like your brand of christianity...
He told me he was Buddhist.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#119444 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh my Gawd! Can you believe that his God did not strike him dead right there? If you want evidence that God does not exist, Rusty just gave it.
Creationists lie constantly. There is not one creationist site that I have ever seen that is not filled with lies.
No, you have provided evidence of a scientist that was all too human. When faced with his own mortality he started to lie for Jesus. Yes, he made idiotic statements about how "bad" the standards of science were in evolution. He could not name any specifics. Just like you cannot say what was wrong with Haeckel's drawings, and there was something wrong with them, scientifically.
Lying for Jesus is not a valid debating tool. All that happens is that people who know you are lying will point this out.
Poor Rusty, he has nothing and he knows it.
You are quite deluded...

You are the only person ...other than the Dude who uses a snake-like sophistication to deceive...for whom I have objective evidence of being a liar

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

#119445 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
There is no indication as to what Jesus believed about creation.
So Dogen, in your new walk in Christ, do you believe Jesus' first miracle? When He turned water into wine? This would be a creation event, right?(John 2:1-12)
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#119446 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
False. Clearly your theology is limited by your small brain.
Ad hominem

But that's ok

You're hurting

But remember time heals all wounds...

And goodness knows...you've got millions of years to lick your's

<quoted text>
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
It refuted creationism
I think IT has been refuted
It refuted nothing
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no indication as to what Jesus believed about creation.
<quoted text>
No of course not

Since you have discarded and dismantled His word entirely..

But for the rest of us...

Matthew 19:4
"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'

Mark 10:6
But 'God made them male and female' from the beginning of creation.

Mark 13:19

For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.

And I shouldn't have to reference this:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning.

3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
You do not know enough about the history of the bible and of early Christianity for me to have a reasonable discussion about this issue with you.
Try me

You're the one who claimed Islam was very scientific...or some such nonsense
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I see, so Scientific fact = delusion. Great. we can all go back to living in caves now.
Go back to living in caves like when...??
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolutionary biology (Evolutionary Medicine) is giving us a fighting chance against diseases like AIDS, cancer, influenza...
You want people to go back to dying gruesome deaths. No thanks. I will stick with science. You can find your own cave.
Your beliefs are just beliefs. They are not based on actual science. Yet I bet you enjoy the benefits that science has given us in the modern world. heck, I bet you even own a computer. Hypocrite.
Patent nonsense

My computer is based on technology that is based on operational science

Nothing in medicine depends on evolution
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#119447 Feb 24, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
He told me he was Buddhist.
That explains everything

Vegetarian atheist

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#119448 Feb 24, 2013
Russell wrote:
More anaemic bleatings from the ignorant masses.....
Another “copy cat” religion slur....
Solomon was right
There is nothing new under the sun
Please see for a scholarly refutation of your claim:
http://christianthinktank.com/copycat.html
**Warning**
Not for the faint hearted
How about the weak of stomach? What a load of indigestible crap!
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#119449 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>

Actually, I am always embarrassed at how frequently and vividly my fellow Christian's lie. I try to write it off as them simply being ignorant and being fearful of learning what might contradict their beliefs.
Poor you

It sucks!

But look at me?

I have to deal with a 'christian' who thinks the bible is wrong and that Jesus did not believe in creation
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Rick Smalley was a creationist. In that vein he was not responding as a scientist. His work in chemistry was in his own field and there he was brilliant.
<quoted text>
And he is not a biologist either. NEXT! He is also an acknowledged creationist. He is also the nutjob the maintained thermodynamics refuted evolution. When shown he was wrong he stopped talking about it to anyone except sympathetic audiences (creationists). In other words he got BUSTED!
This is what the Dude said:
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No honest scientist who objectively looked at the facts could possibly believe evolution is false.
Interestingly though, it's the creationists who are forced to lie.
I have provided exactly what he required
Exactly as you claim I have not provided else where...

He said no honest scientist who objectively looked at the facts could possibly believe evolution is false

I have provided him with two examples out of the very many I could have referenced

Please read what I have written more carefully
Your skim reads are letting you down

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) 24 min Paul Porter1 20,620
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 34 min Chimney1 142,630
Dr. David Berlinski corrects himself on whale e... 56 min Chimney1 38
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 59 min dirtclod 171,828
News Pope Francis Affirms Evolution and Big Bang Theory 1 hr Chimney1 268
News Bobby Jindal: I'm fine with teaching creationis... (Apr '13) 1 hr Chimney1 248
evolution is correct. prove me wrong 13 hr Paul Porter1 9
More from around the web