Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180366 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

#122662 Mar 9, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
BS, none of them were shown to be frauds by Evo scientists, until they were forced to admit it by others first. Deceit is the driving force in Evo pseudo science and evolutionary scientists are deceitful and destroy children's minds.
Thank deceitful scientists and stupid teachers.
Oh Jimbo, you make me laugh.

You take creatardism to the extreme.

And yes, of course it was evolutionary scientists who discovered the frauds. Who do you think it was, I could use another chuckle to two today.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#122663 Mar 9, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
First off who said anything about God? You have no idea what I believe... It's in the realm of science where you fail... "Quick change the subject "... Typical tactics from our evolutionist friends... No one needs a bible to dismantle your farce...
A non-sequitor is a valid response to a non-sequitor. You cannot turn a non-sequitor into a serious debate when you start off with one. You fail.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#122664 Mar 9, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
What its telling you is that your ivory tower has crumbled around you
AND
YOUR EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES....
Your so-called evidence is no better than wishful thinking and story telling
Don't expect everyone to fall for your story telling, Bud
Just because you're gullible and have fallen for it yourself
Nice rhetoric. Mine wasn't.
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
You wax eloquent...
We await evidence...
And you resort to poetic story telling
On the contrary, the evidence awaits in all the posts you missed for the past 8 months. Now time for more Russ rhetoric and/or irrelevant tangents.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#122665 Mar 9, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
You wax eloquent...
We await evidence...
And you resort to poetic story telling
That was poetry to you? Wow, even your bible is closer to poetry than that, and the bible sucks at it.
Russell

Belconnen, Australia

#122667 Mar 9, 2013
If this is "science"
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
That was science. I wonder why you didn't recognize it? Shocking!

Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
The evolution of Bombardier beetle has long been explained.
Quinones are produced by epidermal cells for tanning the cuticle. This exists commonly in arthropods.[Dettner, 1987]
Some of the quinones don't get used up, but sit on the epidermis, making the arthropod distasteful.(Quinones are used as defensive secretions in a variety of modern arthropods, from beetles to millipedes.[Eisner, 1970])
Small invaginations develop in the epidermis between sclerites (plates of cuticle). By wiggling, the insect can squeeze more quinones onto its surface when they're needed.
The invaginations deepen. Muscles are moved around slightly, allowing them to help expel the quinones from some of them.(Many ants have glands similar to this near the end of their abdomen.[Holldobler & Wilson, 1990, pp. 233-237])
A couple invaginations (now reservoirs) become so deep that the others are inconsequential by comparison. Those gradually revert to the original epidermis.
In various insects, different defensive chemicals besides quinones appear.(See Eisner, 1970, for a review.) This helps those insects defend against predators which have evolved resistance to quinones. One of the new defensive chemicals is hydroquinone.
Cells that secrete the hydroquinones develop in multiple layers over part of the reservoir, allowing more hydroquinones to be produced. Channels between cells allow hydroquinones from all layers to reach the reservior.
The channels become a duct, specialized for transporting the chemicals. The secretory cells withdraw from the reservoir surface, ultimately becoming a separate organ.
This stage -- secretory glands connected by ducts to reservoirs -- exists in many beetles. The particular configuration of glands and reservoirs that bombardier beetles have is common to the other beetles in their suborder.[Forsyth, 1970]
Muscles adapt which close off the reservior, thus preventing the chemicals from leaking out when they're not needed.
Hydrogen peroxide, which is a common by-product of cellular metabolism, becomes mixed with the hydroquinones. The two react slowly, so a mixture of quinones and hydroquinones get used for defense.
Cells secreting a small amount of catalases and peroxidases appear along the output passage of the reservoir, outside the valve which closes it off from the outside. These ensure that more quinones appear in the defensive secretions. Catalases exist in almost all cells, and peroxidases are also common in plants, animals, and bacteria, so those chemicals needn't be developed from scratch but merely concentrated in one location.
More catalases and peroxidases are produced, so the discharge is warmer and is expelled faster by the oxygen generated by the reaction. The beetle Metrius contractus provides an example of a bombardier beetle which produces a foamy discharge, not jets, from its reaction chambers. The bubbling of the foam produces a fine mist.[Eisner et al., 2000]
The walls of that part of the output passage become firmer, allowing them to better withstand the heat and pressure generated by the reaction.
Still more catalases and peroxidases are produced, and the walls toughen and shape into a reaction chamber. Gradually they become the mechanism of today's bombardier beetles.
The tip of the beetle's abdomen becomes somewhat elongated and more flexible, allowing the beetle to aim its discharge in various directions.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/bombardier.ht ...
Here's a nice video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#122668 Mar 9, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
You wax eloquent...
We await evidence...
And you resort to poetic story telling
Does Russell know what is evidence?

I bet he does not.
Russell

Belconnen, Australia

#122669 Mar 9, 2013
Then so is this:

Why The Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve is Recurrent

--By Russell

The Laryngeal nerve decided to go for a wander.

It thought innervating the larynx was not enough and that it would better express its range of talents by heading straight down to the R hallux without further delay. It thought it would easily make the journey within a few hours. Well, if the blood can circulate several times around the entire body in an hour...why could it not make a simple trip downwards? As thing stood, he foresaw no obstacles and he headed cautiously towards the diaphragm. The heart going,“Boom, boom....I kin see yer”, in its inimitable deep voice, which surprised the laryngeal nerve since it thought only it provided voice function at all. The laryngeal nerve went,“Whaassup...?” And the heart went,“Whatchoo doin’ down there enyways?”, and the laryngeal nerve went,“ Ah’s goin’ dey-n to the rah-t hall-ex”. And the heart went,“ Ner yer ain’t”, at which point the laryngeal nerve began to scurry southwards, saying,“Last time Ah checked this wuz a free bahdy”. The heart puffed a bit, and summoned the white blood cells, that made their way via muscular invaginations out onto the diaphragm. Once there, they formed muscular hands, they held hands, and in voices like pixies, which also surprised the laryngeal nerve, since it firmly believed that only it conferred voice function, said,“Ner, yer ain’t”. The laryngeal nerve responded tentatively,“En whose gonna stop me?” And the lymphocytes, looking rather muscular and coordinated, said,“We are,” in their pixie voices. The laryngeal nerve pensively considered its options. It decided that offence may perhaps be its best defence. So it said in a low slow drawl,“Ye and whose army”, to which the lymphocytes responded rather quickly,“We’ll get the membrane attack complex if we have to’s”. Now, this did not bode well for the laryngeal nerve. But he decided on another ploy,“Buht, I ain’t got a membrane to attack, nyah, nyah”, to which the lymphocytes in their pixie voice said confidently,“ Yer will when we finish with yer”. So, the laryngeal nerve sighed loudly, developed a head, which it hung, and slowly made the heartbreaking journey back up the chest to where he belonged. The R hallux fast becoming a faded broken dream.....

And that, children, is how the recurrent laryngeal nerve became recurrent. And that is also why whenever you curl your toes, you get a catch in your voice.
_---------

Now if you accept that as science...

I'll gladly accept Igor Trip and Doegm's "science"...

IN A HEART BEAT..

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#122672 Mar 9, 2013
Russell wrote:
If this is "science"
<quoted text>
In other words, it went way over your head ... as usual.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#122674 Mar 9, 2013
Oscar Wilde_ wrote:
<quoted text>You are an idiot. If a non-sequitor is a valid response to a non-sequitor, then by default the original non-sequitor was a valid response. If a serious debate were to fall onto top of you, it would still miss you by a mile.
But that non-sequitor was not a valid response to anything, and thus was not a valid basis for any argument or debate of any kind. It was simply a rogue non-sequitor.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#122675 Mar 9, 2013
Oscar Wilde_ wrote:
<quoted text>We know. You enjoy "Gay tales of Chickens and Chicken hawks", poetry and porn to you.
Nope, don't like porn.
defender

Tucker, GA

#122676 Mar 9, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>So we have no evidence and when we do have evidence it's all a lie anyway because of the big massive world-wide Jewish atheist evolutionist Darwinist scientist elitist liberal socialist communist nazi gayhomo anti-Christian God-hating Satan-worshipping baby-eating illuminati conspiracy? Just like Jimbo says it is?
Dude if you want to believe that human beings have gill slits in early development than fine... But it's a widely known Scientific fact that these are not gill slits but parts of the inner ear... But then again what do you people care about scientific facts?... Might be time to take those meds bud...
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#122677 Mar 9, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Miller knowingly used the wrong gases to achieve the results he wanted...

All experiments using the correct gases held after Miller have failed (T.P Chen)

Miller himself admitted as much but was that lie ever taken out of the text books?
Okay - lets examine this

Care to back up any of this?
defender

Tucker, GA

#122678 Mar 9, 2013
Oscar Wilde_ wrote:
<quoted text>So, which theory of the hundreds do you propose to be the basic? Also, your clan lies about biology and physics being the basis of evolution. Neither are taught in middle school and below. What they pawn off as evolution is simply the religious dogma of evolution.

If they waited for the understanding of singularities, black holes, quantum mechanism and quantum physics, then they know that they could not teach their myth base evolution.

How many children were taught that their oldest mammal ancestor was Jurassic rat? Hmmm,zero, but that is the lie of this decade.
Well said... This guy gets it...
defender

Tucker, GA

#122679 Mar 9, 2013
Oscar Wilde_ wrote:
<quoted text>If you await evidence, then your evolutionhas no basis and your waiting continues. You have no evidence, so you ask for counter evidence. It does not work that way.

We explain the basis of physics in the center of a black hole, which they claim there are over one million in our univere alone and from the universe banged into existence. Yet, they can not find one, measure one, see one or even point to where one exists or existed. However, they do know that the laws of physics and time do not work at the singularity or quantum mechanism level, so if the universe were formed from a black hole, the idea of a billion year time span is not relative, since the laws of relativity cease.
Nice...
defender

Tucker, GA

#122680 Mar 9, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Does Russell know what is evidence?

I bet he does not.
Evidence coming from your side hasn't got the best reputation for being honest... Sorry
defender

Tucker, GA

#122681 Mar 9, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>Okay - lets examine this

Care to back up any of this?
It's freaking known facts dude... Research ye dipshit...
Russell

Belconnen, Australia

#122682 Mar 9, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
And I gave you more too, but your satisfaction is irrelevant and only indicative of your own failure.
Time for you to sing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =SSGdUT985P0XX
Evo-god bites....

Dude singing to evo-god.....ouch!

Dude to evo-god: "Do you tell lies?" "Is it just for show?"

Evo-god bites.....Dude bleeds...

https://www.youtube.com/watch...
defender

Tucker, GA

#122683 Mar 9, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>A non-sequitor is a valid response to a non-sequitor. You cannot turn a non-sequitor into a serious debate when you start off with one. You fail.
Whatever darling... I'm just glad you changed your profile picture... One could scare off a werewolf with that mug of yours...
Russell

Belconnen, Australia

#122684 Mar 9, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay - lets examine this
Care to back up any of this?
Hey Mugwump

Now

Please don't be belligerent...

This is a decent forum..

No rudeness allowed
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#122685 Mar 9, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
It's freaking known facts dude... Research ye dipshit...
If its 'freaking known facts' you will be able to present them.

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) 18 min Thomas 85,702
What's your religion? 21 min Endofdays 156
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 43 min dollarsbill 5,075
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) Sun ChristineM 165,438
Humans evolved from Canadians Sat Mystic science 1
Evolution of the Tennessean species Sat Mystic science 1
Experiment In Evolution, Genetic Algorithms and... Sat was auch immer 10
More from around the web