Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180394 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.

One way or another

United States

#123919 Mar 17, 2013
Hahahaha hahahaha, the Evo morons never tire of making themselves look like the idiots they choose to be.
One way or another

United States

#123920 Mar 17, 2013
Lol, the evolutionary fairy did it!

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123921 Mar 18, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
The fossil record is the result of numerous creatures being buried quickly in mud, as in a world-wide catastrophic flood 4,500 years ago, and reflects the *order of burial* in that event, NOT the order of "macroevolution". Coelacanth, and so many other "living fossils" demonstrates that fact so clearly.
That's just hilarious.

The order of burial just happens to match the evolutionary predictions.

It does NOT match any conceivable "creationist" criterion such as running speed, natural altitude adaptation, or any other criterion that could fit the record into a fairy tale about escaping rising flood waters.

Why are all flowering plants, which appear only in the final quarter of the post-Cambrian fossil record, faster runners than ferns? Do you think ancient low altitude living Giant Sloths were faster than Velociraptors, because they are found much, much later (higher strata). Or for that matter, how did all the ants in the world manage to avoid the flood waters longer than ALL the ancient giant amphibians? Why is archeopteryx trapped in mid-Jurassic strata if it could fly to higher ground than any kiwi?

Use your brain for five minutes to consider what the fossil record would look like if your creation scenario were actually true. No blanking out please, no glossing over. Think about it for once.

Its hard to decide which of the creationist arguments are the most idiotic, but this one comes close.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123922 Mar 18, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Umm no... The abiogenesis event you're talking about here is scientifically impossible... That much is known
Do you have secret knowledge that no scientist is allowed to see? No scientist has ever been able to make this grandiose claim of yours.
and is exactly why evolutionist refuse to use this process as starting point for ToE
No, dummy. Its because ToE comes into play ONLY once a self replicating unit with imperfect heredity already exists. Its whole mechanism works on this basis. The ToE is not affected by HOW that first self replicator comes into existence.

This is exactly why creationists try to bring abiogenesis into arguments about evolution. They know the evidence for evolution is totally overwhelming, so they try to conflate it with our lack of knowledge about abiogenesis. Its the second most stupid creationist argument, right behind "a Flood explains the sequence of the fossil record".

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123923 Mar 18, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Dogen is an escapee from a mental institution.
They obviously did a better job at his institution than they did at yours.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123924 Mar 18, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Scientific evidence of God... You can start by looking out the window. The whole of nature loudly proclaims the existence of a supreme being.
And just as loudly proclaims that Genesis is a mythical account and if there is a God, He certainly did not play much of a role in writing it.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123925 Mar 18, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I've already seen that idiotic video that Dick Dawkins produced.
Any "force" that could remove incorrect keystrokes would have to have extensive knowledge of the English language... In other words... Intelligence.
No, its an analogy.

Natural selection removes "incorrect keystrokes" by the simple mechanism that they do not survive as well as "more correct keystrokes".

Argument by analogy is dangerous at the best of times, but in the hands of creotards its like giving dynamite to a three year old.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123926 Mar 18, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, so it all sounds like "magic" to you... no problem! Most morons are like that. But really now, you would take the "magic" of an old man wearing a stupid hat and a black dress over the "magic" of a scientist in a lab coat. You really are a dumbazz, aren't you?
Arthur C Clarke famously said that advanced technology would look like magic to more primitive cultures.

I suppose we can expand that - real science will always look like magic to the terminally stupid.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123927 Mar 18, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the best they have.
Trying to fit all the following into the 10,000 year timeframe is just one more YEC absurdity, along with...

- the observable universe with light travelling for billions of years to reach us

- sedimentation on Earth that could not have occurred within the timeframe

- magnetic reversals showing hundreds of millions of years of activity

- geological formations such as the Deccan Traps showing periods of massive volcanic activity that had to take hundreds of thousands of years each

- progressive change in the fossil record that could not conceivably occur in 10,000 years nor be explained by any rising flood water scenario

And really that is just the tip of the icebrg...speaking of which...ice cores in the Antarctic with annual deposits extending back at least 700,000 years...overlying the usual strata we find in other parts of the world.

Yes, we see laughable attempts at special pleading by "YECs" for all of these, and note that not only do they rely on quote mining and distortion of science, but their one-off explanations for each phenomenon are NOT mutually consistent with each other!

On the other hand, the above facts all converge to form a coherent view of the universe that makes sense wherever we look.
Mugwump

UK

#123928 Mar 18, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You opinion is not science.
You obviously know nothing about AIDS and have simply ignored the evidence I've postd.
Quite correct, unsupported opinion is not science, which is why when you said you had scientific evidence for the existence of god - I expected you to present some.

And if I recall the only evidence you presented for your HIV/AIDS claims was a discredited crank from some 2 decades ago.

Don't worry - will let you climb down from the embarrassing petard you seem to have hoisted yourself upon.

I normally find that after 5+ times of asking a creatard to actually backup their claims the effort on my part becomes worthless- just try not to make shit up next time.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#123929 Mar 18, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
"Do you fall to your knees, you millions?
Do you sense the Creator, world?
Seek Him above the starry canopy,
beyond the stars he must dwell."
From Beethoven's No. 9 ("Choral"), which sits on the pinnacle of the Mount Everest of Symphonies!
Happy St. Patrick's Day to all!

Along with Mozart Symphony No. 41

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#123930 Mar 18, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You opinion is not science.
You obviously know nothing about AIDS and have simply ignored the evidence I've postd.

Oh man! Massive projection in the extreme!

You are the one who chooses to believe anti-science myths in the place of actual science.

Your posts are great comedy. It is hysterical that you claim to have been to college and taken science classes. What a ruse.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#123931 Mar 18, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite correct, unsupported opinion is not science, which is why when you said you had scientific evidence for the existence of god - I expected you to present some.
And if I recall the only evidence you presented for your HIV/AIDS claims was a discredited crank from some 2 decades ago.
Don't worry - will let you climb down from the embarrassing petard you seem to have hoisted yourself upon.
I normally find that after 5+ times of asking a creatard to actually backup their claims the effort on my part becomes worthless- just try not to make shit up next time.
Scientific evidence for the existence or non existence of God. Now that would be something.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#123932 Mar 18, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
A genetic code cannot self organize.
Posting a link to a google search is meaningless.
You haven't read anything.

This is an assertion.
The google search did make my point quite successfully.
I have read real science, which is more than I can say for you.

BTW, why are you so angry and illogical?


Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
you seemed to disagree with that point before.
<quoted text>
What would be the driving mechanism for it doing so? "Chemical evolution" occurs because of natural processes. Just as in your self organizing RNA above.
What is to stop RNA (or a similar precursor molecule) from forming DNA. What mechanism prevents it when RNA is made up of the same bases and atoms? The process of chemical combination is finite and fairly well known.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#123933 Mar 18, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Dogen is an escapee from a mental institution.

True story. Sorry you did not make it.
Mugwump

UK

#123934 Mar 18, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Scientific evidence for the existence or non existence of God. Now that would be something.
HTS insisted he had it - but turns out he meant
'Look out the window - cool isn't it'

So basically he made it up

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#123935 Mar 18, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
It's laughable to watch you try to defend a veritable quack in your desperate attempts to prop up your religion. If you were interested in science, you would plainly acknowledge the fraudulent nature of Haeckle's drawings. However, your quest for truth is superseded by your desire to defend your atheistic religion.
It seems that you are unable to show any genuine documentation (not creation.com fabrication and BS) to show his drawings were produced to convince anyone that early embryos looked virtually identical

You are unable so show any genuine documentation (not creation.com fabrication and BS) that suggest his drawing were the product of fraud

Therefore you are unable to show that you are not a liarů

.

Wrong my zero tolerance of lies drives my quest for truth. For the most part I believe that most atheists consider lies do be a no, no. Perhaps some are not as opposed to lying as I am but that makes little difference to the fact that having no belief in god means there is much less need to lie. However if you feel comfortable lying then that your own problem and typical of your faith even taking into account that your god specifically condemns lying to the extent that he wrote it in stone.

P.S. Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby

I will remind you (again because we all know you are so hard of thinking) that I am not atheist. An atheist BELIEVES there is no god (any god). I KNOW there is no god.

“When you treat people as they ”

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#123936 Mar 18, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
In terms of "fraud" there is a lot of similarity between his work and the works of Schiaparelli, Burton and Percival Lowell in their sketches of the canals on Mars.
Telescope quality was still poor then by today's standards and the same goes for microscopes. And the worst those guys were accused of was being a bit too imaginative and not accounting for optical distortions.
This of course is truth and yet another point the creatards seem to ignore

I find it rather hypocritical that they can lie and make unfounded (often slanderous) accusations when it suits their purpose and then get so incredulous (or even totally ignore the point) when you apply exactly those same arguments to the babble.

One law for them and one for everyone else.
One way or another

United States

#123937 Mar 18, 2013
You morons have all BS. It's all speculation. Lol
One way or another

United States

#123938 Mar 18, 2013
Funny, scientists cannot be questioned about anything in evolution by the general public, because they have nothing. Morons

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
One species or three 7 min pshun2404 5
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 25 min One way or another 61,523
Curious dilemma about DNA 46 min Subduction Zone 11
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 59 min Subduction Zone 2,709
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 hr THE LONE WORKER 220,695
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 hr Aura Mytha 28,325
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 5 hr Subduction Zone 160,325
More from around the web