Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 179619 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 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#122803 Mar 10, 2013
Right wrote:
<quoted text>
Testing
Fail.
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#122804 Mar 10, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Another thought
I think we've all seen schools of fish swimming in circles, surely that has something to teach about spin.
Are there other entities that move in circles on purpose, besides astronauts and race car drivers?
This HAS to be a Poe
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#122805 Mar 10, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Its fine to be a Christian. If you can grant the obvious fact that most of what you know about Christ was written generations after His departure and you actually have no way of knowing what He believed about everything, or even that just because He said something, it was right.[QUOTE]
And what was written several hundreds of years before He was born

The Bible is the most reliable book of antiquity

With embarrassingly large amounts of irrefutable evidence from textual criticism, passing both internal and external reliabilty tests, archaeology and other parallel historical accounts

[QUOTE who="Chimney1"]<q uoted text>
Some people are Christians because they believe the general moral message He is purported to have offered is a good one. The same is true of all Buddhists, by the way, although they of course did not make the mistake of deifying their bringer of enlightenment.[QUOTE]
God is about relationship

Do you believe in your mother because of her "general moral message" or because you have experience of her, her real-ness, her extraordinary love?
Such is the reality of relationship with God

Only thing is.....

He will not settle for a phone call every other weekend

He demands your ALL

Check out "When I survey the wondrous cross"

[QUOTE who="Chimney1"]<q uoted text>

I wonder at your need to believe that one man on this earth was ever unconditionally right about everything.
And frankly elevating Jesus to the status of God is a violation of the monotheism you also supposedly uphold and no amount of "mystery" can absolve you of this simple logical fact. Jesus cannot be both God and the "son of God" except in the sense that all humans are the children of God, if one believes in God. That is why the Jews rejected your Cult and the Muslims saw the need to correct it, putting Jesus in his rightful place as a "prophet".[QUOTE]
Jesus is the second Adam

Even Adam is referred to as 'son of God'

Jesus claimed to be God

Hence His execution.......which had to occur

Have you read C S Lewis? You should

Another worthwhile text is Josh McDowall's "Evidence that demands a verdict"

No correction WHAT SO EVER is required of the Bible

------I am on an iPad and it's pure misery trying to type with two fingers---but I have taken up my cross.....

You have to appreciate that even Eve understood that the Saviour was to come from her
She said at the birth of Cain..."I have brought forth a man, the Lord"

Her theology was correct......but timing was wrong

[QUOTE who="Chimney1"]<q uoted text>
Of course, I just go one step further. If there is a God, his creation is not described in fallible books and myths of humans, whether Bible or Torah or Quran, but revealed in the physical universe He created. When you read the book of nature, its clear that this universe is billions of years old and life evolved, no matter what primitive human societies believed before us.
No
You're wrong
You can not put Islam or Buddhism into the same sentence as Christianity
Jesus CLAIMED He is God

His tomb was empty

Creation is as Genesis has described

Like you, I wish we knew more....

The geological column is a necessity for biological evolution to be true

The 'old age' of the universe is quite easily the greatest hoax ever to be perpetuated by man
Russell

Belconnen, Australia

#122806 Mar 10, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet us skeptics persist in believing in the miracle that mere evidence and logic could transform the thinking of a die-hard creationist!
Its fun when the opposition start tripping over each other's feet
Russell

Belconnen, Australia

#122807 Mar 10, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Shown the undeniable succession of ape/hominid intermediates that have been unearthed in a time sequence consistent with evolution, these guys are simply forced to scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Are you aware of the SCANDALOUS FACT that a museum somewhere left human-like feet on a display of Lucy after paleontologists showed there were some differences? Or another SCANDALOUS FACT that another museum somewhere or other had left the flippers on a presumed whale intermediate display after new fossil finds had shown that the creature did not have flippers?
Russell does, and he somehow thinks this is comparable on the "lie scale" to:
http://creationmuseum.org/
Defending the indefensible

Lucy NEVER had anything even remotely like human hands and feet...

Never

That is quite well accepted

However

When questioned about it the zoo responded it was helpful to "teach" evolution

http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...

http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...

Whereas here's the "science" about ape phalanges
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...

(J. Stern & R. Susman, 1983, Am. J. Phys. Anthropology 60:279-212)

Note that the circle with the dot inside is evidence for AL333 (australopithecines specimen) and that it shows that the fingers were just as curved, if not more curved than a chimpanzee. Hmmm! That isn’t what we saw in the other pictures.

http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...

So

If its helpful to "teach" evolution....
Out right fraud is fine....
defender

Tucker, GA

#122808 Mar 10, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>Incorrect.


defender wrote, "<quoted text> The theory of gravity is yet unproven but so is time... Is the speed of light a proven constant? "


Yes, in a vacuum.

defender wrote, "<quoted text> Do the laws of science that we know of exist outside our little corner of the universe?"


Yes

defender wrote, "<quoted text> Can energy create matter? "


Yes

defender wrote, "<quoted text> Higgs Boson perhaps?"


The HB creates mass, not energy, per se.

defender wrote, "<quoted text>.... Does DNA show only a one hundred thousand year decay rate hence rendering evolution even more impossible than it already is? "


No

defender wrote, "<quoted text> How about the earths magnetic field decay rate which if it is proven to be consistent renders the theory void altogether ..."


It is already shown to be a variable.


defender wrote, "<quoted text> So many questions ... And that's just a few... But hey keep reaching till you can fall asleep feeling safe.. "


Did you really not know the answers to your school child questions?

Not looking good for our system of education.
Classic example of arrogance mixed with ignorance... Love for you to prove any of it... And if you can then call CNN cause you're going to be very rich...
defender

Tucker, GA

#122809 Mar 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
Defending the indefensible

Lucy NEVER had anything even remotely like human hands and feet...

Never

That is quite well accepted

However

When questioned about it the zoo responded it was helpful to "teach" evolution

http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...

http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...

Whereas here's the "science" about ape phalanges
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...

(J. Stern & R. Susman, 1983, Am. J. Phys. Anthropology 60:279-212)

Note that the circle with the dot inside is evidence for AL333 (australopithecines specimen) and that it shows that the fingers were just as curved, if not more curved than a chimpanzee. Hmmm! That isn’t what we saw in the other pictures.

http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...

So

If its helpful to "teach" evolution....
Out right fraud is fine....
Lucy is a three foot chimp... Now how many human bones were placed in the skeleton is the real debate... Remember that these are the same bunch of people caught placing ape jaw bones on human remains... The lie is crystal clear...

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#122810 Mar 10, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Lucy is a three foot chimp...
Hilarious

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#122811 Mar 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Defending the indefensible
Lucy NEVER had anything even remotely like human hands and feet...
Never
That is quite well accepted
Thats funny, because chimps and gorillas do have hands strongly resembling humans.

The feet, well they are significantly different. But the consensus at the time was that Lucy had enough markers of bipedalism that putting humanish feet made more sense than apeish feet. Whats more, other afarensis remains corroborate a foot that is art least intermediate.
When questioned about it the zoo responded it was helpful to "teach" evolution
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...
Whereas here's the "science" about ape phalanges
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...
(J. Stern & R. Susman, 1983, Am. J. Phys. Anthropology 60:279-212)
Note that the circle with the dot inside is evidence for AL333 (australopithecines specimen) and that it shows that the fingers were just as curved, if not more curved than a chimpanzee. Hmmm! That isn’t what we saw in the other pictures.
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...
So
If its helpful to "teach" evolution....
Out right fraud is fine....
Oh rubbish. Some museum curator makes a silly statement.

Creationists on the other hand have built entire Disney sized parks that are pure fantasy. Not even close. Its always a joke when you shameless liars try to present the few errors and frauds of science in the same light as your wholesale corruption of truth.

Your second picture is a reconstruction of two lines of evidence. A pair of quite human foorprints were found contemporaneous with the ONLY kinds of hominids that are known to have been in existence at the time. That's not lying, its just putting 2 and 2 together.
defender

Tucker, GA

#122812 Mar 10, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>Hilarious
But true....

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#122813 Mar 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
No
You're wrong
You can not put Islam or Buddhism into the same sentence as Christianity
Jesus CLAIMED He is God
His tomb was empty
Creation is as Genesis has described
Like you, I wish we knew more....
The geological column is a necessity for biological evolution to be true
The 'old age' of the universe is quite easily the greatest hoax ever to be perpetuated by man
No, really, all you have is a collection of books written decades or more after the purported facts. Actually the earliest of these, Mark, is minimal on the miracles and "Jesus = God" angle, and we see these claims becoming progressively more grandiose as later books are added.

As for Genesis agreeing with science, its rubbish as soon as you get to specifics...and anyway I could retrofit just about any creation myth to science if I took your approach of ignoring the glaring discrepancies and merely citing the similarities. That is not Science, Russell, thats not even logical or objective thinking.

You are merely a case study in extreme cognitive bias.

Why don't you take a close look at the discrepancies between these decades-after-the-purported-fa ct accounts?

The geological column and relisation that the Earth could not be as young as the Bible claims, predated evolution by many decades. Claims by "Creation Scientists" that what we observe can be squeezed into <10,000 years are the biggest fraud perpetrated on a bunch of dumb Cultists ever recorded.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#122814 Mar 10, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
But true....
You are aware that there are now numerous australopithecine era fossils discovered?

You are aware that paleontologists can describe to you numerous ways in which these fossils differ from a chimp?

You are aware that later Australopithecus fossils such as Sediba show greater similarity to what appears next, Homo habilis, and earlier Australo. fossils such as Lucy (afarensis) have more apelike characteristics?

Nooooo, in your utter inability to refute the actual evidence and science, you resort to "lying conspiracy" claims. You are a joke.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#122815 Mar 10, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Another thought
I think we've all seen schools of fish swimming in circles, surely that has something to teach about spin.
We already know why they do that. It confuses predators, making it more difficult for a hungry fish to fixate on any particular target and eat it. Seriously, read a science book sometime. There's just TONS of information in them that would answer pretty much every question you've posed to us. And, you'd be smarter after having done so. Wouldn't that be cool?
One way or another wrote:
Are there other entities that move in circles on purpose, besides astronauts and race car drivers?
What possible difference could that make?

Have you ever taking LSD?
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#122816 Mar 10, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Classic example of arrogance mixed with ignorance... Love for you to prove any of it... And if you can then call CNN cause you're going to be very rich...
Just to clarify :

You have NO intention of backing up your 3 claims about the Miller experiment ?

That's fine of course , but does somewhat cast doubt on the veracity of your other arguments as you have been shown to just make stuff up.

Anyway, lets draw a line under the whole sorry affair and just agree that you made stuff up to further your cause.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#122817 Mar 10, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Classic example of arrogance mixed with ignorance... Love for you to prove any of it... And if you can then call CNN cause you're going to be very rich...
Let me get this straight: you exhibit profound scientific ignorance, your ignorant questions are answered, and then you demand that the answers be demonstrated to you? Why don't you do your own homework? Your questions were answered. People who pay attention to science know why the answers are what they are. If you don't, that's not OUR problem. Go read a book.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#122818 Mar 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
The Genesis Flood
No...explanations need to have evidence to support them. You might as well have cited leprechaun trickery.

And, again, citing a website that explicitly states that if something contradicts the Bible, it has to be wrong, even if that "something" is empirical evidence. They're exactly anti-science. Their stories must be true, no matter what, and ain't no EVIDENCE going to convince them otherwise!

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#122819 Mar 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a ridiculous question
How can nothingness result in intelligence
Never mind
I sympathize
I too once did mental gymnastics to avoid Him
Now you do mental gymnastics to avoid reality. I suppose you consider that an upgrade.
One way or another

United States

#122820 Mar 10, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are there any modern horses in strata from 10 million years ago?
No
Are there any fossils from 10 million years ago that show strong resemblance to a horse but also some significant differences?
Yes.
Do these fossils extend back 20 million years ago?
No.
Are there any fossils from 20 million years ago that show some resemblance to the creature of 10 million years ago that itself showed strong resemblance to a horse but also some significant differences?
Yes.
Do THOSE creatures exist 40 million years ago?
No.
Are there any fossils from 40 million years ago that show some resemblance to the creatures of 20 million years ago that itself showed a lot of resemblance to a creature 10 million years ago that itself showed resemblance to a horse?
Yes.
Final question. Does this pattern suggest evolution through time or ex-nihilo creation of all kinds separately all at once right at the beginning?
You answer that one, if you can. Perhaps all you creationists can chip in and help, as we all know that "One way or another" has some cognitive limitations.
Pure BS. How many different kinds of monkeys are there? How many different kinds of fish are there? You are a one sided person, you limit your thinking for what, to make yourself look like a purposeful idiot, because that's exactly what you do.

You act like you're some kind of protector for evolution as well as a childish idiot, trying to prove religion or god as wrong and only inferior and stupid people believe such.

You have pre wired your brain for failure and deceit. You and those like you destroy children's thinking. You are a moron and garbage, that cares nothing for the truth. You have no respect for others and they can have no respect for you.

Nothing in your post is proof. It's all speculation, just like the Evo moron scientists, you must be just like them.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#122821 Mar 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>

Creation is as Genesis has described
Really? Evidence, please. Show us the evidence that birds came before land animals.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#122822 Mar 10, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Defending the indefensible
Lucy NEVER had anything even remotely like human hands and feet...
Never
That is quite well accepted
However
When questioned about it the zoo responded it was helpful to "teach" evolution
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...
Whereas here's the "science" about ape phalanges
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...
(J. Stern & R. Susman, 1983, Am. J. Phys. Anthropology 60:279-212)
Note that the circle with the dot inside is evidence for AL333 (australopithecines specimen) and that it shows that the fingers were just as curved, if not more curved than a chimpanzee. Hmmm! That isn’t what we saw in the other pictures.
http://calvarychapel.com/assets/_resampled/re...
So
If its helpful to "teach" evolution....
Out right fraud is fine....
Do you EVER get information from scientific sources rather than religious sources? You do realize the inherent bias that exists by doing so, yes?

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 min Brian_G 13,324
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 21 min Brian_G 31,377
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 2 hr Blitzking 197,534
Rome Viharo debunks evolution 5 hr Paul Porter1 2
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 6 hr Paul Porter1 151,011
Evolution in action May 27 MIDutch 1
News RANT: Is "global warming" today's version of th... May 25 bearings 2
More from around the web