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

#119552 Feb 24, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet moron, you show no proof.
One more time for the hard of thinking.

Article.

Purple printing.

Right click with mouse.

Jimbo is a perpetual idiot. Why can't we harness this as a form of energy?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119553 Feb 24, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Lying POS.

SZ is correct urb. It is the responsibility of the person with the new idea to support it with science (including observations) or it goes the way of the dodo bird.

Sanford has no data. His ideas are not even based on observed data. What he has (or I should say HAD) was a sciency sounding philosophy backed up (as are all philosophical thesis) by concepts. No one should have taken him seriously to begin with but there were those desperate to have a straw to clutch as their outdated ideas were being swept down the scientific drain.
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#119554 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Jimbo is a perpetual idiot. Why can't we harness this as a form of energy?
Can I just say I will take 5% for the branding.

'Consumers - your energy problems are now resolved - power your whole home with the PSM - perpetual stupidly machine'
One way or another

United States

#119555 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and it is a shame that we don't ignore them more and talk more about real science among those of us who are actually interested.
Would anyone be interested in discussing one of the following stories?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/...
You're a mental patient and the evolutionary scientists have absolutely nothing to go on, but hey, why don't you or those scientists show the progression. LMAO

You got nuthin moron.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119556 Feb 24, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the probability is around 1 in 3 billion. However the probability of any point mutations occurring *at all* is 10,000% minimum (as long as reproduction occurs).
Keep arguing against goal-directed evolution and you will always miss the bus - we in the meantime will be arguing for ACTUAL evolution.

I had to count decimal places on my fingers, but your math is (roughly) correct.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119557 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.

You just keep making things up as you go.
One way or another

United States

#119558 Feb 24, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are saying you HAVEN'T used those two websites to support your posts ?
And the deceitful moron is?
Aww, no proof.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119559 Feb 24, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You have GOT to be kidding me.
Polymath would have a field day.

I miss poly.

I learned a lot from him
One way or another

United States

#119560 Feb 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
One more time for the hard of thinking.
Article.
Purple printing.
Right click with mouse.
Jimbo is a perpetual idiot. Why can't we harness this as a form of energy?
Simply show us the scientist that claimed to write the piece moron.
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#119561 Feb 24, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Aww come on child, prove what you claim.
Which claim specifically ?

That you haven't used spurious websites that have nothing to do with the claim you are making.?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119562 Feb 24, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Lying, deceitful, POS.

LOL. You have as much of nothing as ever.


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?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119563 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?

More projection
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#119564 Feb 24, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Aww, no proof.
Just say

'I have never linked to a site about relativism to refute relativity - as god is my word'

And we can take it from there

(Hint - I bookmark a lot)

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119565 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.

This is incorrect. Math is not science. Math is a tool. As are you.

If you are looking for the purest science I would recommend physics.
One way or another

United States

#119566 Feb 24, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Which claim specifically ?
That you haven't used spurious websites that have nothing to do with the claim you are making.?
The following is your claim.--Mugwump | 1 hr ago
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>

To be fair - Jimbo isn't exactly the best person to cry about references.

He has linked to a website about relativism to prove relativity wrong

And an obviously spoof website about why gravity is wrong (believe it had a quote about the gravitation force of fat people)

So simply show us your proof of your relativism and relativity claim.

You're a deceitful moron that can't.

If you can, show how I was wrong.:-)
HTS

Mandan, ND

#119567 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Save it. Sanford is a creationist. Creationists will say literally anything.
you're an atheist. Therefore you have no moral values and will say or do anything to justify your perverse worldview.
One way or another

United States

#119568 Feb 24, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Just say
'I have never linked to a site about relativism to refute relativity - as god is my word'
And we can take it from there
(Hint - I bookmark a lot)
Please bring the proof. You won't, because you made yourselves look like the morons you are.

Please bring the book marks. Lmao it will just prove what utter fools you are.
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#119569 Feb 24, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This is incorrect. Math is not science. Math is a tool. As are you.
If you are looking for the purest science I would recommend physics.
Interesting point re: physics - never a huge student of the subject but can understand it is the 'base science' as it were - and there are still huge unknowns in the field - so how come creationists rarely attack it in the same way they do biology.

The obvious example is abiogenisis / Big Bang ---->> evolution/gravity

Suspect that the reason is evolution contradicts the timescales that are (supposedly) defined In The bible(if taken literally) but then does all of science surely?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119570 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?

You are wrong.

The odds of flipping 250 heads in a row is 5.52715E-76.

That is according to Excel and about 60 seconds of work.

5.52715E-76 is not "impossible".


Maybe you meant "infinitely improbable".

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#119571 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?

Projection test.

All of the Creos get busted constently but continue in their deceitful ways regardles. Why? What's in it for them? WHo knows?

Yep, it works better for us. Projection confirmed.

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 It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 4 min Endofdays 160,232
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Just another Joe 220,525
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 1 hr yehoshooah adam 2,641
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Into The Night 28,308
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 hr Into The Night 61,046
News Book aims to prove existence of God (Nov '09) 5 hr Regolith Based Li... 99
How can we prove God exists, or does not? (May '15) Mar 15 fransherrell 227
More from around the web