Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180300 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.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#123325 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
I say there is only three possibilities for evolution: 1. rearranging existing genes, 2. removing genetic information, and 3. ruining genetic information.
Notice there is no mechanism for creating new information.
If anyone has a fourth way, I'd sure like to hear it.
Evos think about it. If your theory were true, there would have to be a very prolific mechanism in place for creating new information. You should have massive volumes of cases of new genetic information being created. If universal common ancestry is true, this would predict encyclolopedic knowledge resulting from the infinitesimal incremental changes required from single cell all the way to man; yet...you don't even have one simple case. None! Why don't you get this?
you missed gene insertion, fusion, and rearranging does change the traits, thus it can add or remove traits as well.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#123326 Mar 12, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, no evidence and FYI, wikipedia is not evidence
It is correct. Stalin did become an atheist. Though there are a lot of possibilities of why he turned against religious people as a whole, the one reason that is very simple to understand is that religion is a threat to the government if it is not chosen by that government. This has been utilized in Europe by many governments though. The dishonesty comes when they ignore all the others and focus only on the few rulers who decided to just outright ban all religions instead of choosing only one.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#123327 Mar 12, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
I could tell by those muscles.

Get a room.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#123328 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
It's clear all the evos are in denial mode. They no longer even try to answer the questions. Makes me wonder why they stick with such a failed theory. Oh well...

Ah, irony.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#123329 Mar 12, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
What you say is irrelevant
You forgot mutation, or does that screw up you theories so you ignore it?
You are also assuming hereditary memory.
So we can see from your post that you are basing your belief on ignorance and assumption.
Nuf said…
I didn't forget mutation; that's No. 3. It is you who is immersed in ignorance and assumptions. And if you can dispute what I claim, go for it. We already shot down the nylonase bacteria mutation, which was your only candidate, so that pretty much leaves you with nothing but a false theory.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#123330 Mar 12, 2013
DinoBone wrote:
<quoted text>
This guy pretty much destroys the whole theory.
http://www.powerfultruth.com/Kent_Hovind.html

That was some pretty hysterical stuff.

Ya know that some people are so science ignorant that they will believe it. That is a sad testimony to our educational system, to be sure.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#123331 Mar 12, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
you missed gene insertion, fusion, and rearranging does change the traits, thus it can add or remove traits as well.
No I didn't. Rearranging previously existing information doesn't create anything more complex.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#123332 Mar 12, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, no evidence and FYI, wikipedia is not evidence
So let me get this straight, You, ChristineM, an obviously anti-religious bigot with an axe to grind, says Wiki is wrong about Stalin becoming an atheist, but you know better. Right! Good luck with that! I'll be checking your edits in Wiki on this matter.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123333 Mar 12, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Aww poor baby, you went and made yourself and all those scientists look like idiots. Not one fossil line shows small gradual changes, which is the heart and soul of evotardism.
Thanks idiot. Lol--you morons claim the scientific method and then you go against it.
Quite the opposite.

Out of the possible combinations of lineages leading from the first australopithecine to the modern human - there is more than one, because we have found so many intermediate forms - ALL of them show the small gradual changes you are claiming you want to see.

Go take a look, and stop whining from ignorance as usual.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123334 Mar 12, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Chimney, don't pretend to be an expert on comparative primate
anatomy.
You don't know that Lucy walked upright... you're blindly parroting whatever BS is posted on talkorigins.
A human femur and a gibbon skullcap (found 46 feet apart).
And, BTW, Dubois also found fully human skeletons in the area but didn't report those findings for over 25 years.
Your religion is laced with scientific fraud.
Nope, I do not know, because it is a subject of some controversy even among experts. Whether Lucy was fully upright "obligate biped", or just more adept at upright walking than say a chimp or a gorilla.

It may even be that the common ancestor of all three was a more comfortable biped than either the chimp or the gorilla are today.

However, there are many points of difference between Lucy and chimps, in the human direction, just as we would expect form an EARLY intermediate.

Your other claims that Dubois was a fraud are merely the usual tiresome propaganda we expect from creationists who prefer to sit in their chairs whining about the work of real scientists, who got off their butts and worked in the far corners of the earth for years in discomfort and often risk...I have to wonder if some of you guys have a single redeeming character trait behind the self deception, cowardice, laziness and self immolation mixed with self congratulation...qualities your cult seems to cultivate.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123335 Mar 12, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
A religion does not require a belief in God. Example: Buddhism.
Evolution fulfills all criteria for a religion. You worship natural selection, and Chuck Darwin and Dick Dawkins are your high priests.
Silly. Nobody worships natural selection. Or random variation. Or genetic drift. Or Malthusian competition (with the exception of some Republicans).

Taken together and with logic applied, these simple facts of nature lead to a conclusion and that conclusion applied for a long period leads to the possibility of evolution.

There is nothing magical, mysterious, or worshipful about any of it. However, it does lead to an amazing conclusion, I will grant that.

Is this theory and its predictions borne out by empirical evidence?

Without doubt.

So you can take your feeble attempts at mapping evolution onto you own faith based template - your world view, to use UC's words - and shove it. Science is a culture of doubt, skepticism, logic, and empirical evidence. Worship and faith are your bag, not ours.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#123336 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like the one you just posted above? No, you are the only ones that do that.

LOL.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#123337 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
I say there is only three possibilities for evolution: 1. rearranging existing genes, 2. removing genetic information, and 3. ruining genetic information.

False trichotomy.

Secret 4th option: Adding genetic information.

Urban Cowboy wrote:
Notice there is no mechanism for creating new information.
If anyone has a fourth way, I'd sure like to hear it.

(Biased) mutation, migration (gene flow), genetic drift, genetic hitchhiking, coevolution and natural selection as mechanisms of change (genetic variation, differential reproduction).

Why do you never look this up?

Urban Cowboy wrote:
Evos think about it. If your theory were true, there would have to be a very prolific mechanism in place for creating new information.

See above.

Urban Cowboy wrote:
You should have massive volumes of cases of new genetic information being created.

We do.

Urban Cowboy wrote:
If universal common ancestry is true, this would predict encyclolopedic knowledge resulting from the infinitesimal incremental changes required from single cell all the way to man; yet...you don't even have one simple case. None! Why don't you get this?

Not sure what you are ranting about. Reword and resubmit for consideration if you think this point survives my refutation above.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#123338 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
"Raised in the Georgian Orthodox faith, Stalin became an atheist."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_stalin#Re...

Nice blurb, but it does not contain the evidence.

"Was Stalin an Atheist"
Chosen by Asker
Not when he died, and not for most of his life. People who claim that his alleged atheism was the cause of his suppression of organized religion are missing an important point. In a totalitarian, communist society like the USSR, absolute loyalty to the state is demanded. Organized religion divides that loyalty. In Stalin's mind, suppression of religion was a way of maintaining order and power. His personal views on the existence of God were secondary.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index...

Based on my survey of several links I pulled up I would say that Stalin was functionally an atheist, but probably held some theological beliefs.

Regardless, Stalin was an evil man who rejected Evolution.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#123339 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't forget mutation; that's No. 3. It is you who is immersed in ignorance and assumptions. And if you can dispute what I claim, go for it. We already shot down the nylonase bacteria mutation, which was your only candidate, so that pretty much leaves you with nothing but a false theory.

When did you "shoot down" nylonase? I must have missed it.

DNA is a chemical (okay,... actually a class of chemicals). It undergoes chemical change. "Information" is not an issue as there is no "information" in chemicals. Function is an issue.

You just go on arguing the same things no matter how often you are shot down.

Do you want me to list the articles showing that the genome can and does change?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123340 Mar 12, 2013
HTS wrote:
And, BTW, Dubois also found fully human skeletons in the area but didn't report those findings for over 25 years.
Your religion is laced with scientific fraud.
Another Creationist lie as usual, now that I look into it.

The Wadjak modern human remains were found "in the same area of Java" but not in the same strata, and unlike Java Man were found surrounded by modern, not ancient fauna.

The creationist LIE being, of course the "inference" that from the same AREA means from the same STRATA. Yeah right. How do you guys sleep at night?

Dubois DID document the finds but of course finding modern remains is not what he was looking for anyway and they had far less scientific significance, so he spent less time and effort on them.

The REALITY is that we now have NUMEROUS excellent Homo Erectus / Ergaster specimens to the point that even creationists cannot deny their existence.

You guys merely waste time arguing whether they are actually apes (that used sophisticated well crafted stone tools) or humans (with Adam lacking forehead and chin, with a skull capacity of 900cc!)

hahahaha

Reality just DOES NOT FIT YOUR MYTH.

When are you going to accept that, and stop with the lying?

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#123341 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
So let me get this straight, You, ChristineM, an obviously anti-religious bigot with an axe to grind, says Wiki is wrong about Stalin becoming an atheist, but you know better. Right! Good luck with that! I'll be checking your edits in Wiki on this matter.

You are correct. Wikipedia is always right.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_flood

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#123342 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
So let me get this straight, You, ChristineM, an obviously anti-religious bigot with an axe to grind, says Wiki is wrong about Stalin becoming an atheist, but you know better. Right! Good luck with that! I'll be checking your edits in Wiki on this matter.
You are calling the kettles black right now.

“Be strong ...”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#123343 Mar 12, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
It is correct. Stalin did become an atheist. Though there are a lot of possibilities of why he turned against religious people as a whole, the one reason that is very simple to understand is that religion is a threat to the government if it is not chosen by that government. This has been utilized in Europe by many governments though. The dishonesty comes when they ignore all the others and focus only on the few rulers who decided to just outright ban all religions instead of choosing only one.
This is something I have looked at quite extensively. There is no evidence to suggest he became atheist except for a couple of quotes that religion repeatedly uses and considerable incredulity. Taken in the context of Russian attitudes at the time and his rise to power you need to take them with just so much salt. Except for the relatively short time he was consolidating his power there is nothing whatsoever to suggest he was atheist. Both before and after this period in the early 20s he behaved in a very christian way. As they say, actions speak louder than words – the words are “You know, they are fooling us, there is no God” or the actions of rebuilding a devastated religion, convening a council to elect a new church Patriarch, re-opening theological schools and churches.

“Be strong ...”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#123344 Mar 12, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't forget mutation; that's No. 3. It is you who is immersed in ignorance and assumptions. And if you can dispute what I claim, go for it. We already shot down the nylonase bacteria mutation, which was your only candidate, so that pretty much leaves you with nothing but a false theory.
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TCT...

and 3. ruining genetic information.

Ruining genetic information is not mutation

My candidate? WTF have you been smoking – please advise when I have EVER spoken of nylonase bacteria mutation – or are you simply lying

My discussion is the mutation of gene adjacent to the melanin producing OCA2 which caused blue eyes in humans in the bosphorus region between 6 and 10,000 years ago

Consider it disputed.

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) 5 min Rose_NoHo 168,755
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 6 min Into The Night 94,284
Altruistic Behaviour negates the theory of Evol... 12 min Rose_NoHo 14
Why the Big Bang is ALL WRONG. 1 hr KJV Bible Believer 290
Evolution is an ANCIENT RELIGION 3 hr Davidjayjordan 4
Evolution is boring as Hell (Nov '17) 4 hr Davidjayjordan 49
E equals MC squared 4 hr Davidjayjordan 9