Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180394 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.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119512 Feb 24, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>. You're busted, Dude. I've forced you to admit that evolution has nothing to do with science.
Math is not science fool. It is a very different discipline. Mathematics provide very useful tools that science uses all of the time. But an subject is not the tools that it uses.

Is a piano music? No, it is a tool that music uses. The same applies to mathematics and science.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#119513 Feb 24, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
What, again?? What was wrong with the first few hundred times?
Oh, yeah, forgot you're a YEC. Never mind.
So even though I give you every option, you still resort to deceit and lies. How do you sleep at night?
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#119514 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you are.
Too bad that you don't understand the rules of debate along with evolution.
So where is Sanford's evidence that supports his claim? That is not really too much to ask now is it?
Sanford doesn't make that claim. I am not the one who has the burden. You are.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#119515 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Math is not science fool. It is a very different discipline. Mathematics provide very useful tools that science uses all of the time. But an subject is not the tools that it uses.
Is a piano music? No, it is a tool that music uses. The same applies to mathematics and science.
Mathemtics is the purest science in existence. All other disciplines of science are subservient to math. You obviously have no idea what science is.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#119516 Feb 24, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You have GOT to be kidding me.
Polymath would have a field day.
Have you actually done the math? 250 heads in a row is impossible. Are you telling me I'm wrong?
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#119517 Feb 24, 2013
All of the Evos get busted constently but continue in their deceitful ways regardles. Why? What's in it for them? WHo knows?
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#119518 Feb 24, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Have you actually done the math? 250 heads in a row is impossible. Are you telling me I'm wrong?
Wrong, technically it is very improbable - but given enough parallel attempts and enough time,(or variations thereof) it is not only possible but probable.

This is basic probability.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119519 Feb 24, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Mathemtics is the purest science in existence. All other disciplines of science are subservient to math. You obviously have no idea what science is.
No, you are showing yourself to be a complete idiot. The scientific method is not used in mathematics. Mathematics is a completely different discipline.

You will not find one mathematician or scientist that agrees with your statement.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#119520 Feb 24, 2013
No benefial mutations? Then how can macro evolution happen?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119521 Feb 24, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
All of the Evos get busted constently but continue in their deceitful ways regardles. Why? What's in it for them? WHo knows?
Urb, you constant liar. Evolution has yet to be busted by any of you tards.

How's that search for corroborating evidence for Sanford's bogus claims coming?
HTS

Mandan, ND

#119522 Feb 24, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong, technically it is very improbable - but given enough parallel attempts and enough time,(or variations thereof) it is not only possible but probable.
This is basic probability.
Extreme improbability is impossibility.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#119523 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you are showing yourself to be a complete idiot. The scientific method is not used in mathematics. Mathematics is a completely different discipline.
You will not find one mathematician or scientist that agrees with your statement.
You have no concept of what science is. Physics and chemistry would be reduced to nothing without mathematics.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#119524 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Urb, you constant liar. Evolution has yet to be busted by any of you tards.
How's that search for corroborating evidence for Sanford's bogus claims coming?
You moron, the burden of proof is on you as it is your claim.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#119525 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you are.
Too bad that you don't understand the rules of debate along with evolution.
So where is Sanford's evidence that supports his claim? That is not really too much to ask now is it?
Have you read his book? Every other sentence is referenced by peer-reviewed journal articles.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#119526 Feb 24, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
On the contrary, I didn't claim you had no reference, but that you misrepresent them constantly. And the fact that you don't even believe their methods is doubly valid justification for referring to you as a liar.
I've noticed that you, SZ, and the other evo-morons on this thread always scream "liar" whenever you're backed against the wall. Tell me,...how do you define "lie" in terms of mutations and natural selection?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119527 Feb 24, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Have you read his book? Every other sentence is referenced by peer-reviewed journal articles.
If that was so you would think that Urb could find some evidence from his book. I have not seen any yet.

Once again Urb, you are the one making a POSITIVE claim. I made a negative one pointing out your lack of evidence. The burden of proof is on the one making a POSITIVE claim.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119528 Feb 24, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You have no concept of what science is. Physics and chemistry would be reduced to nothing without mathematics.
So what? It is not science, it is a tool of science.

Or is that concept above your pointy little head.

Is a piano music?
HTS

Mandan, ND

#119529 Feb 24, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
So even though I give you every option, you still resort to deceit and lies. How do you sleep at night?
You need to give Dude a break. Every day he has to look in the mirror and confront a spineless atheist that is staring back at him. He has to live with himself. Think about it.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#119530 Feb 24, 2013
"Most mutations are neutral and have no effect on the gene or resulting protein. A study published in 2000 shows that humans average 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 mutations per generation. A more recent study shows that the beneficial mutation rate in bacteria is very high."

"Given the estimates for the overall mutation rate in E. coli (30) and its genomic deleterious mutation rate (1), our estimate of Ua implies that 1 in 150 newly arising mutations is beneficial and that 1 in 10 fitness-affecting mutations increases the fitness of the individual carrying it."
http://skepticink.com/smilodonsretreat/2013/0...

"Computer control of Darwinian evolution has been demonstrated by propagating a population of RNA enzymes in a microfluidic device. The RNA population was challenged to catalyze the ligation of an oligonucleotide substrate under conditions of progressively lower substrate concentrations. A microchip-based serial dilution circuit automated an exponential growth phase followed by a 10-fold dilution, which was repeated for 500 log-growth iterations. Evolution was observed in real time as the population adapted and achieved progressively faster growth rates over time. The final evolved enzyme contained a set of 11 mutations that conferred a 90-fold improvement in substrate utilization, coinciding with the applied selective pressure. This system reduces evolution to a microfluidic algorithm, allowing the experimenter to observe and manipulate adaptation."
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/1...
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#119531 Feb 24, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text> Extreme improbability is impossibility.
Wrong again,

It's quite simple

The probability of someone throwing 250 heads (or tail) is 1/x

At some point if Y attempts are done then it will happen.

Again this is basic probability - now I grant you that Y is so astronomically large in this particular case that to all intents and purposes we can say it is not likely to happen even if 7 billion people tossed a coin every second for a trillion years.

BUT - you are missing the point - a better analogy would be if every time someone got (say) 10 heads in a row - then those would be preserved and then only 240 coins are tossed and so on.

But it is somewhat fruitless talking about an abstract - care to present what you real world probability argument is w.r.t evolution (I can guess but better for you to present it).

As a side issue - whilst you may claim victory as I said 'for all intents and purposes'- I was making a basic point about probability - which as you insist (wrongly) that maths is the basis of all science - I thought you would demonstrate some knowledge of the subject , even at a basic level.

Oh - and while we at it - fancy showing evidence that NO female prostitute has ever contracted HIV/AIDS - or that no case has EVER been contracted through needlestick?

The above is important as it would be defense against the accusation that creationists are prone to lying to make their point (or in your case dodging as have asked you to back up your point numerous times)

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 Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 9 min Messianic114 2,711
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 20 min Science 61,551
One species or three 36 min Subduction Zone 7
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 50 min Mabinogi 220,703
Curious dilemma about DNA 4 hr Subduction Zone 11
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 7 hr Aura Mytha 28,325
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 9 hr Subduction Zone 160,325
More from around the web