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
HTS

Williston, ND

#119968 Feb 25, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus taught us that he did not guarantee there would not be conflict. If you choose righteousness and your brother or sister chooses evil, you will probably be faced with arguments and conflicts. Conversion to Christ can result in straind family relationships. Christ never meant to delude believers that he promised a life devoid of all conflict.
Excellent comment. Unfortunately, you're talking to spiritual midgets who have no desire for virtue or truth.
One way or another

United States

#119969 Feb 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Excellent comment. Unfortunately, you're talking to spiritual midgets who have no desire for virtue or truth.
I especially hate what they do, but it seems they were harmed by religion. I will keep hammering them for their childish stupidity, but it seems they must have been molested by the clergy, by what they say and do.

Pity is good.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119970 Feb 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Excellent comment. Unfortunately, you're talking to spiritual midgets who have no desire for virtue or truth.
LOL, liars standing up for other liars, how rich.

And the spiritual midgets are those who don't know right from wrong unless they read it in a book written by bronze age camel humpers.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119971 Feb 25, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
I especially hate what they do, but it seems they were harmed by religion. I will keep hammering them for their childish stupidity, but it seems they must have been molested by the clergy, by what they say and do.
Pity is good.
And the ultramoron thinks he is hammering anyone. This is truly astounding. By his projection it seems there may be some truth in his exwife's allegations about Jimbo and his children.
HTS

Williston, ND

#119972 Feb 25, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, liars standing up for other liars, how rich.
And the spiritual midgets are those who don't know right from wrong unless they read it in a book written by bronze age camel humpers.
Do you enjoy being a religious bigot? Does it make you feel good to mock the sacred beliefs of others?
HTS

Williston, ND

#119973 Feb 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't told me a thing, you mental cripple. I've been everywhere and done everything twice. I have more respect for a cockroach than I have for your whiny little ass.
Do you actually believe that you're making a point?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119974 Feb 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text> Do you enjoy being a religious bigot? Does it make you feel good to mock the sacred beliefs of others?
How am I a religious bigot. I do not mock the sacred beliefs of others I mock the idiotic beliefs of others.

You have to believe in a god that lies. For me that seemed sacrilegious. If you are a YEC like Jimbo and rusty you have to believe that every scientist from Newton on was wrong. Isn't that just a bit arrogant?

I mock people who have foolish beliefs and then try to defend them using science that they have no understanding of nor do they wish to learn. Doubly inexcusable.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119975 Feb 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Do you actually believe that you're making a point?
Sadly no.

Everyone knows that Jimbo is best left ignored. He is perhaps the most delusional, most uneducated, most incompetent, total ass that I have ever seen on the internet. Did I write most delusional? Yes, I see I did. You must understand that he is incredibly delusional. If he is on your side it is the worst thing possible for your argument.
One way or another

United States

#119976 Feb 25, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, liars standing up for other liars, how rich.
And the spiritual midgets are those who don't know right from wrong unless they read it in a book written by bronze age camel humpers.
Gosh, that's exactly what you Evo morons have done best for many years now, only you deceitful morons don't stand up, you slither on your bellies.
One way or another

United States

#119977 Feb 25, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Sadly no.
Everyone knows that Jimbo is best left ignored. He is perhaps the most delusional, most uneducated, most incompetent, total ass that I have ever seen on the internet. Did I write most delusional? Yes, I see I did. You must understand that he is incredibly delusional. If he is on your side it is the worst thing possible for your argument.
Hahahahahahahaha, children always squeal the loudest about those that reveal the truth.

I have nothing to protect now children, I can play your game now.
One way or another

United States

#119978 Feb 25, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
And the ultramoron thinks he is hammering anyone. This is truly astounding. By his projection it seems there may be some truth in his exwife's allegations about Jimbo and his children.
If only you had a brain, I wouldn't have to deal with morons. Lmao
HTS

Williston, ND

#119979 Feb 25, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
How am I a religious bigot. I do not mock the sacred beliefs of others I mock the idiotic beliefs of others.
You have to believe in a god that lies. For me that seemed sacrilegious. If you are a YEC like Jimbo and rusty you have to believe that every scientist from Newton on was wrong. Isn't that just a bit arrogant?
I mock people who have foolish beliefs and then try to defend them using science that they have no understanding of nor do they wish to learn. Doubly inexcusable.
You know nothing about the God I believe in.
I have not attempted to prove my religion with science... you have.
You are drunken with arrogance and condescension.
How can anyone take anything you say seriously when you constantly spew bigotry and hatred? It is obvious that your perverted worldview has resulted in self deception.
You mock me for "foolish beliefs... You think I''m stupid for not believing in your ridiculous fairytales about microbes evolving into humans. You think millions of years can create any complexity because you have faith in a process that has never been observed by man... You cannot counter any of my claims. All you ever do is create distractions and smokescreens that are transparent to anyone who is interested in objective science.
One way or another

United States

#119980 Feb 25, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
How am I a religious bigot. I do not mock the sacred beliefs of others I mock the idiotic beliefs of others.
You have to believe in a god that lies. For me that seemed sacrilegious. If you are a YEC like Jimbo and rusty you have to believe that every scientist from Newton on was wrong. Isn't that just a bit arrogant?
I mock people who have foolish beliefs and then try to defend them using science that they have no understanding of nor do they wish to learn. Doubly inexcusable.
Aww the poor baby, you have nothing of your own, so cut and paste is all you have.

The so called leaders today, pervert science and so much more, creating you idiots that have nothing of your own, so you must copy whatever they give you.

Kiss their A-s-s children, because a brown nose is all you've ever known.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119981 Feb 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You know nothing about the God I believe in.
I have not attempted to prove my religion with science... you have.
You are drunken with arrogance and condescension.
How can anyone take anything you say seriously when you constantly spew bigotry and hatred? It is obvious that your perverted worldview has resulted in self deception.
You mock me for "foolish beliefs... You think I''m stupid for not believing in your ridiculous fairytales about microbes evolving into humans. You think millions of years can create any complexity because you have faith in a process that has never been observed by man... You cannot counter any of my claims. All you ever do is create distractions and smokescreens that are transparent to anyone who is interested in objective science.
I really don't care what your superstitions are. And don't say that I spew bigotry and hatred. That always starts with you and yours and then you can't take it when it comes back at you.

Yes, I am rather condescending to idiots who don't know that they are idiots. And worse yet will not even attempt to learn. I know you are a total moron who has some strange bigotry against the fact that we evolved.

Too bad all science is on my side and you know none is on yours. Why else would you resist a chance to actually learn something?Z

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#119982 Feb 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Your paradigm relies on the unfounded belief that infinitely large numbers of possible pathways to functionality exist. What is your scientific evidence for that assumption?
No it does not. Merely an indeterminate number, which cannot be foreseen. Irreducible Complexity on the other hand arbitrarily restricts the assumed number of pathways with no evidence that life actually has to follow those restrictions.

When looking at the 3-boned middle ear, we have a good fossil sequence showing this macro-evolutionary event step by step. Yet no biologist living 300 million years ago could have predicted this series of changes in advance. Many aspects of complex systems, as we see even today in world economics, or in weather forecasting, are extremely and inherently unpredictable in many ways.

Scientists now know that even if they had a sensor on every square meter of the earth's surface and every supercomputer in the world analysing the data, they still would not be able to tell you what the temperature will be in Boston on the 30th of April this year, apart from estimates using historical averages for the time of year.

Science in these cases is restricted to predicting the underlying forces at work rather than the exact future state. Likewise, when looking in hindsight, we still cannot exactly say what particulars caused what. IC makes this logical mistake because it assumed that evolution proceeded with the end in sight. Those multi-boned jaws of reptiles did not evolve in order to later enable the 3-boned middle ear, feathers did not evolve originally to enable later flying, and so on. The error of ID is to assume that evolution says these things did.

Reminds me of conspiracy theorists who sift through historical data looking for the "grand plan of the conspirators" through the ages... Illuminati, Masons, Jews, whatever. Perhaps they take comfort in the idea that somebody is planning things, that the alternative - that it was all contingent, circumstantial, unplanned and unplannable...is the most horrifying prospect of all to them.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#119983 Feb 25, 2013
Poor Jimbo, everybody in the world has kicked him when he was down. At least that is what he thinks.

He is a failure as carpet layer and now he is trying to break into science. Talk about laugh my ass off!
One way or another

United States

#119985 Feb 25, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No it does not. Merely an indeterminate number, which cannot be foreseen. Irreducible Complexity on the other hand arbitrarily restricts the assumed number of pathways with no evidence that life actually has to follow those restrictions.
When looking at the 3-boned middle ear, we have a good fossil sequence showing this macro-evolutionary event step by step. Yet no biologist living 300 million years ago could have predicted this series of changes in advance. Many aspects of complex systems, as we see even today in world economics, or in weather forecasting, are extremely and inherently unpredictable in many ways.
Scientists now know that even if they had a sensor on every square meter of the earth's surface and every supercomputer in the world analysing the data, they still would not be able to tell you what the temperature will be in Boston on the 30th of April this year, apart from estimates using historical averages for the time of year.
Science in these cases is restricted to predicting the underlying forces at work rather than the exact future state. Likewise, when looking in hindsight, we still cannot exactly say what particulars caused what. IC makes this logical mistake because it assumed that evolution proceeded with the end in sight. Those multi-boned jaws of reptiles did not evolve in order to later enable the 3-boned middle ear, feathers did not evolve originally to enable later flying, and so on. The error of ID is to assume that evolution says these things did.
Reminds me of conspiracy theorists who sift through historical data looking for the "grand plan of the conspirators" through the ages... Illuminati, Masons, Jews, whatever. Perhaps they take comfort in the idea that somebody is planning things, that the alternative - that it was all contingent, circumstantial, unplanned and unplannable...is the most horrifying prospect of all to them.
Lmao,-- merely an indeterminate number? You fruking moron, why didn't your mother just slap you and drop you off at an asylum where you belong? You pretend that you are fooling everyone else, which is just funny as hell, especially when you do it constantly.

I see that it works on your Evo moron buddies, but then everyone's not as dumb as y'all.

You then spew the following pathetic, moronic trash where your own words refute themselves, all in the same sentence.,--Irreducible Complexity on the other hand arbitrarily restricts the assumed number of pathways with no evidence that life actually has to follow those restrictions.

You fruking moron, go back to your hole.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#119986 Feb 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Prove it. Your cherished doctrine of genetic determinism has been scientifically debunked by the ENCODE project.
Ah, the "cherished doctrine of genetic determinism". Another straw-man construction by creatards.

Why would biologists care, in the evolutionary sense, whether everything is in the genes, or whether some function can be determined in other parts of the genome or indeed other parts of the cell? Why would biologists care, in the evolutionary sense, about epigenetic change? Why would they care even about environmental adaptability?

None of these things would matter to the veracity of evolution.

What you are doing is making the usual error of those who see reductionism in action. Until there was reason to believe otherwise, the working model was to assume characteristics were determined by the genes in the first instance. This was not a "doctrine", it was a working model, starting with the simplest approach.

The same reductionism was to assume that geological processes were gradual until proven otherwise, and that the universe was in a stable state until proven otherwise, that all members of a single chemical element were identical until proven otherwise, that the constants of nature stay constant until proven otherwise, etc.

The usual and tired ploy of you creationists is to claim these working assumptions are "doctrines", which is your feeble attempt to bring down the rational empirical enterprise to your own lowly and superstitious level. The only "doctrine" science adheres to is that the final arbiter of truth is observation.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#119987 Feb 25, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You are not interested in science, SZ. You are religious zealot, wallowing in self absorption and arrogance. Anything that doesn't fit with your worldview is rejected without any investigation. I will again remind you... evo-babbling is not science.
You are back to projecting.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#119988 Feb 25, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Lmao,-- merely an indeterminate number? You fruking moron, why didn't your mother just slap you and drop you off at an asylum where you belong? You pretend that you are fooling everyone else, which is just funny as hell, especially when you do it constantly.
I see that it works on your Evo moron buddies, but then everyone's not as dumb as y'all.
You then spew the following pathetic, moronic trash where your own words refute themselves, all in the same sentence.,--Irreducible Complexity on the other hand arbitrarily restricts the assumed number of pathways with no evidence that life actually has to follow those restrictions.
You fruking moron, go back to your hole.
Perhaps you should stop pretending that you have a clue as to what anybody else is talking about.

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
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 31 min DanFromSmithville 134,700
Atheism - A Non Prophet Organisation (Mar '11) 1 hr Al the Scot 997
How would creationists explain... 1 hr Dogen 449
god is not real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Jun '06) 2 hr Ooogah Boogah 13,641
Intelligent Design: Still Dead [EvolutionBlog] 5 hr geezerjock 1
Why Are There No Transitional Animals Today? (Mar '09) 5 hr The Dude 514
Evolutionists staes that white people are more ... (Jun '06) 9 hr spiderlover 77
More from around the web