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
117,921 - 117,940 of 172,083 Comments Last updated 8 min ago

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121035
Mar 1, 2013
 
HTS wrote:
<quoted text> The imagined evolution of the eye represents a classic evolution bedtime story.
Show me some science behind your claims that an eye could evolve. Have you ever observed one micro-step of the process? No... You have wild unsupported conjectures. That is not science.
Still stuck on stupid I see.
HTS

Williston, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121036
Mar 1, 2013
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you are mistaken. That is now how she was dated. Do you have any evidence that shows she was dated in the manner that you stated?
In other words a link please.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_ (Australopithecus)

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121037
Mar 1, 2013
 
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_ (Australopithecus)
I think you have the wrong link there. That only goes to a Wiki page that deals with the name "Lucy". It is not a link to the "Lucy".

Try again.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121038
Mar 1, 2013
 
Oh what the heck. HTS is going to be stuck on stupid all night long. I have a little bit of pity for him.

He probably meant this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_ (Australopithecus)

Which has this statement in it:
The fossil was dated reliably in 19901992 by applying the argon-argon radiometric dating method to the volcanic ash surrounding Lucy.
If you read that it does not say that the ash was next to Lucy. It was the ash surrounding Lucy. Lucy was buried in the ash that they dated.

Now unless Lucy had the ability to breathe while encased in volcanic ash for thousands and thousands of years I will assume she died when she was buried.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121039
Mar 1, 2013
 
Okay, I will have to admit that HTS probably did give the correct link. For some reason my link goes to the Lucy name page and not the Lucy Austalopithcus page too. There must be some snafu with either Wiki or this site.

For teasing you for giving a bad link I do apologize HTS.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121040
Mar 1, 2013
 
HTS wrote:
<quoted text> The imagined evolution of the eye represents a classic evolution bedtime story.
Show me some science behind your claims that an eye could evolve. Have you ever observed one micro-step of the process? No... You have wild unsupported conjectures. That is not science.
Explain how it could not, in detail, and demonstrate the actual mechanisms that prevent it from happening.

“I started out with nothing”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121041
Mar 2, 2013
 
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>it doesn't matter how many unproven methodologies you have propping up your million-of-years-old dates. All are founded on unprovable evolutionary assumptions... therefore all are equally invalid.
I said before...finding an arrowhead in the vicinity of Precambrian rocks does not prove that the arrowhead was made 530 million years ago. If you corroborate your dating methods with other methodologies, you still haven't proven anything.
For the sake of argument... Even if Australopithecus is millions of years old... That does not prove that it evolved into man. You have no scientific evidence. You have stories.
I does not matter that you deny evidence, they are all founded on hard scientific fact and are somewhat more relevant that a guess that goddidit

If you can date an arrowhead to 530 million years ago then I suggest you look for errors in your test. or are you just showing your stupidity?

If your verify your test with other methods then you have corroborated your test. However if that corroboration in the form of double and triple testing is denied by those who are a bit thick in the head proves that you are a bit thick in the head.

No it does not prove that Australopithecus evolved into man. It proves how old it was and once again you show your ignorance. It is the transitional line of evidence in both dating and genetics that offer the proofs. As in the way that early Cro-Magnon show marked differences in skeletal structure than later Cro-Magnon and they show marked difference in skeletal structure to modern humans. Transitional. A point that you deny from the point of ignorance and a point that I have seen and measured. You cannot argue from the point of ignorance, it just makes you look stupid and childish

However you are welcome to build you strawman barriers based on nothing but misunderstanding, guesswork and denial on principal if it makes you feel more secure in your goddidt faith. We all like a good chuckle now and again.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121042
Mar 2, 2013
 
Let's look a little closer at The Clergy Letter Project. Many of them (hundreds) are United Church of Christ members, a notoriously liberal, progressive church that teaches sex education in church and is basically gay/lesbian. Here's a sample:

The Rev. Susan Brecht
Community Church of Atascadero
United Church of Christ
Atascadero, CA

Here "Rev." Susan in an interview as she campaigns against proposition 8:

http://www.psr.edu/alum-rev-susan-brecht-agai...

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121043
Mar 2, 2013
 
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You can keep repeating the same arguments, but they are all self-evident fallacies. If you have a reference from a credentialed mathematician that can back up your claims, I'd love to look at it.
"it doesn't matter how many unproven methodologies you have propping up your million-of-years-old dates. All are founded on unprovable evolutionary assumptions... therefore all are equally invalid."

I'll do that as soon as you do that for this quote of yours. Back up your claim with evidence or GTFO.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121044
Mar 2, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Let's look a little closer at The Clergy Letter Project. Many of them (hundreds) are United Church of Christ members, a notoriously liberal, progressive church that teaches sex education in church and is basically gay/lesbian. Here's a sample:
The Rev. Susan Brecht
Community Church of Atascadero
United Church of Christ
Atascadero, CA
Here "Rev." Susan in an interview as she campaigns against proposition 8:
http://www.psr.edu/alum-rev-susan-brecht-agai...
What is a "real" church? And, since they're all founded upon fairy tales and nonsense, what difference could it POSSIBLY make? Believing in magic is believing in magic, whether you're a literalist or not.

Also, do you support slavery? God does, and the New Testament does nothing to change that. If you don't support slavery, why don't you think God's rules are good enough for you? If his were truly a Christian nation, do you think we SHOULD have slavery? If not, why shouldn't we follow the laws of God? Would you also support marrying your daughter off to her attacker if she were raped? God does, and the NT didn't change that, either.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121045
Mar 2, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
What is a "real" church? And, since they're all founded upon fairy tales and nonsense, what difference could it POSSIBLY make? Believing in magic is believing in magic, whether you're a literalist or not.
Also, do you support slavery? God does, and the New Testament does nothing to change that. If you don't support slavery, why don't you think God's rules are good enough for you? If his were truly a Christian nation, do you think we SHOULD have slavery? If not, why shouldn't we follow the laws of God? Would you also support marrying your daughter off to her attacker if she were raped? God does, and the NT didn't change that, either.
What!? Sacrilege!!!!!

Obviously you did not follow Urb's posts. Male make believe is much better than female make believe. If you play make believe with girls you can get cooties! Didn't your mother teach you anything?
HTS

Williston, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121046
Mar 2, 2013
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
Oh what the heck. HTS is going to be stuck on stupid all night long. I have a little bit of pity for him.
He probably meant this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_ (Australopithecus)
Which has this statement in it:
<quoted text>
If you read that it does not say that the ash was next to Lucy. It was the ash surrounding Lucy. Lucy was buried in the ash that they dated.
Now unless Lucy had the ability to breathe while encased in volcanic ash for thousands and thousands of years I will assume she died when she was buried.
No autopsy was performed. They have no idea how Lucy died. It was not "encased" in volcanic ash. What scientific evidence do you have that a volcano erupted at the time of Lucy's death? You apparently don't understand the fundamental assumptions of Radiometric dating...
HTS

Williston, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121047
Mar 2, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain how it could not, in detail, and demonstrate the actual mechanisms that prevent it from happening.
It's not up tom e to prove the impossibility of your stories, Have you ever heard of the scientific method? If a hypothesis is advanced, it must be validated.How has eye evolution ever been validated?
HTS

Williston, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121048
Mar 2, 2013
 
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
So historians and scientist have ALL gotten it wrong as far as SUmerian civilization, CHinese pottery and ancient cave paintings?
And you, boring, pathetic, uneducated Jesus Freak, are the only one who has it right? LOL!
You are living in La-La land if you think all scientists agree on the truth of your stories.
HTS

Williston, ND

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121049
Mar 2, 2013
 
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
I does not matter that you deny evidence, they are all founded on hard scientific fact and are somewhat more relevant that a guess that goddidit
If you can date an arrowhead to 530 million years ago then I suggest you look for errors in your test. or are you just showing your stupidity?
If your verify your test with other methods then you have corroborated your test. However if that corroboration in the form of double and triple testing is denied by those who are a bit thick in the head proves that you are a bit thick in the head.
No it does not prove that Australopithecus evolved into man. It proves how old it was and once again you show your ignorance. It is the transitional line of evidence in both dating and genetics that offer the proofs. As in the way that early Cro-Magnon show marked differences in skeletal structure than later Cro-Magnon and they show marked difference in skeletal structure to modern humans. Transitional. A point that you deny from the point of ignorance and a point that I have seen and measured. You cannot argue from the point of ignorance, it just makes you look stupid and childish
However you are welcome to build you strawman barriers based on nothing but misunderstanding, guesswork and denial on principal if it makes you feel more secure in your goddidt faith. We all like a good chuckle now and again.
. If you had any understanding of the scientific method and of the actual evidence for human evolution, you would persist in this self made delusion that you've created that all science points to your unsubstantiated theories.
Cro-Magnon was not a transitional species. Australian aboriginals have unique skeletal feature from Europeans. They are a unique race... Nothing more. Do you have any idea how much genetic variability can exist within one species? Have you ever compared a bulldog skull with the skull of a greyhound? They are one species.
I'm surprised that you're still stuck n the outdated paradigm of Cro-Magnon being transitional. Can you provide a peer reviewed paper documenting that Cro-Magnon was transitional and was not simply a modern human? All you can provide is opinions based on imaginative stories. Do you have proof of the ages of Cro-Magnon remains? What methodologies were used?

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121050
Mar 2, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
Believing in magic is believing in magic
So what you're saying is...that explains why the "Rev." Susan signed the Clergy Project Letter? Because she believes in Magic?

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121051
Mar 2, 2013
 
You gotta watch the video! Notice all the fartknockers galavanting around and the sign on the semi-truck, "Vote No on Prop.8". This one video sums up the whole Clergy Letter Project. The "Rev." Susan says "No, we don't take the Bible literally". Classic.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121052
Mar 2, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
Also, do you support slavery? God does, and the New Testament does nothing to change that. If you don't support slavery, why don't you think God's rules are good enough for you? If his were truly a Christian nation, do you think we SHOULD have slavery? If not, why shouldn't we follow the laws of God? Would you also support marrying your daughter off to her attacker if she were raped? God does, and the NT didn't change that, either.
Perhaps you should learn more about the life of Jesus. He basically went around breaking all the Old Testament laws and that is why he was executed. Haven't you heard the parable about putting old wine in new wineskins? Oh, I forgot you can't understand those.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121053
Mar 2, 2013
 
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>It's not up tom e to prove the impossibility of your stories, Have you ever heard of the scientific method? If a hypothesis is advanced, it must be validated.How has eye evolution ever been validated?
Actually, yes it is up to you. The assertions made that define the theory of evolution are based on evidence, you are attempting to contradict that evidence, therefore it is up to you to present your case using evidence. If you do not use evidence to present your case, then your case can be dismissed without evidence since there is already evidence supporting what you are attempting to discount.

So again, explain your opposition and demonstrate how the evidence is wrong.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121054
Mar 2, 2013
 
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Gillette, unlike you, I am not a mindless go-with-the-flow sheep. I look at the evidence (and there isn't any), and I judge for myself.

You are only trying to kid yourself.
You are the very definition of a mindless go-with-the-flow sheep.

As there is no evidence for creationism at all...... you do the math.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••