Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 178661 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.

Mugwump

UK

#124059 Mar 19, 2013
One way or another wrote:
There are always millions on the edge of poverty and they suffer the most, because they make just a little too much to get help. They are the ones taxed the most.
Fair comment actually

in the UK currently there is a proposed 'bedroom tax' which will mean anyone on welfare who has an unused bedroom will have a reduction in benefits. Projected to raise around 500m

At the same time, income tax for the highest earners is being dropped from 50 to 45 %

And the poverty gap widens
Urban Cowboy

Arlington, VA

#124060 Mar 19, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
"..and besides that many more issues are raised that your Flood scenario cannot possibly deal with."
Such as?
Mugwump

UK

#124061 Mar 19, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Such as?
Well there's how the various species ended up at the current geographically distinct locations from a single starting point - koalas being the oft cited example - I recall you explained this by a booming trade in koala skinned handbags with the raw material being kept in oz for convenience

Or how 8 individuals repopulated the planet in a little over 2500 years - contrary to what population figures suggest.

Or how the pyramids were built with such a low population in the early years post flood.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#124062 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
In order to believe in evolution, you have to believe that the proverbial monkey will one day type Shakespeare. This is because essentially all proposed mechanisms of evolution require one improbability after another.
You simply assume that ToE is a fact, and cavalierly ignore principles of probability. It stems from the arrogant mindset of atheism.
How many more times will you regurgitate this nonsense assertion from the creationist website? It has been demonstrated to be a fallacy, yet you still hold onto it as if it actually proves something.
HTS

Williston, ND

#124063 Mar 19, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
How many more times will you regurgitate this nonsense assertion from the creationist website? It has been demonstrated to be a fallacy, yet you still hold onto it as if it actually proves something.
You don't know the language of the genetic code.
To you DNA is pixie dust.
You can throw any transposon or duplicated chromosome at an organism and "poof"... any complexity imaginable because you know that evolutiondidit.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#124064 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know the language of the genetic code.
To you DNA is pixie dust.
You can throw any transposon or duplicated chromosome at an organism and "poof"... any complexity imaginable because you know that evolutiondidit.
Wow, projecting this much should get you a job in a theater.
HTS

Williston, ND

#124065 Mar 19, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Every child discovers the world is a sphere with surprise for the first time and asks why people at the bottom don't fall off. That's common sense. Its not a scientific argument.
You have eviscerated nobody, and your grandiose talk simply adds to the consensus that you are deluded. All you have done is parrot a few long debunked arguments which any evolutionist could roll in his sleep.
On the other hand, no creationist has ever offered a convincing flood based explanation for the fossil order found in the strata. Not even close. Yet this is something evolution explains and even predicted.
Now, Sanford makes a glib stab at gene duplication but in reality he only ever deals with point mutations. And he makes the embedded assumption that mutations are occurring from an original point of "perfection" which never existed nor needed to.
How interesting that you would lecture me about logic...when all arguments for evolution rely on perceived logic and no experimentation. Has a fruitily ever been selectively bred into a reproductively isolated novel species? Have any of the millions of generations of bacteria resulted in multicellular life? You have no observable experimental evidence of anything.
I have heard all of your worn out arguments, and they have been repeatedly proven false. All arguments that you have presented are nothing less than attempts disproofs of intelligent design.
Do you actually think that by perceived "disproof" of a worldwide flood that you're providing evidence for evolution? If you do, you have a very weak theory indeed.
Do you seriously think that by the random addition of frame shift mutations, transposons, ERVs etc. that a purposeful genetic code can result? What is the scientific basis for that ridiculous assumption?
You have only one answer...evolutiondidit.
You have philosophically rejected God, and you are left with no other alternative. That is not science.
One way or another

United States

#124066 Mar 19, 2013
As the gov pits one class against the next and the next, the gov arraigned the demise of all.
One way or another

United States

#124067 Mar 19, 2013
How much profit is taken from the system that is designed to care for the sick? Wow, nothing like beating a person when they are down. That sounds like America's gov and banking systems.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#124068 Mar 19, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Einstein DID NOT believe in an Abrahamic god, he wrote I believe in Spinoza's God (nature), who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind.
I never suggested that Einstein believed in an Abrahamic God. He believed in a god. And you said that you "know" that there is no God. Therefore, you are calling Einstein and countless other brilliant scientists "morons".

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#124069 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I never suggested that Einstein believed in an Abrahamic God. He believed in a god. And you said that you "know" that there is no God. Therefore, you are calling Einstein and countless other brilliant scientists "morons".
So then Einstein's god must be the right one and yours is the wrong one, after all, he was smarter than you, right?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124070 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I never suggested that Einstein believed in an Abrahamic God. He believed in a god. And you said that you "know" that there is no God. Therefore, you are calling Einstein and countless other brilliant scientists "morons".
Fine, he also believed the theory of evolution. You really should not cite someone who would disagree with every single one of your attempts at an argument.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#124071 Mar 19, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you outline the maths that makes evolution impossible - don't mean detailed numbers - just which variables you are looking at , rough values , any assumptions ?
It's YOU that is making the claim that probability disproves evolution - but not giving any details why
Second time of asking
I can reference all of this if you have doubts....

1. The probability of a specific point mutation occurring at a specific site is about 1 in 2 billion births in humans and other higher mammals.

2. G. Stebbins estimated that about 500 mutations would be necessary for one animal to evolve into a reproductively isolated species.

3. G. Simpson (describe horse evolution), estimated that the selective value of most mutations is 0.1%

4. Sir Ronald Fisher demonstrated that the probability of survival of the average beneficial small mutation with a selective value of 0.1% is 1:500 births.

5. Therefore, the probability of a single beneficial point mutation occurring at a specific site and being preserved in the population is 1 in 1 trillion births.

6. The difference between DNA of humans and chimps is about 2%(generous concession to evolutionists). Therefore, humans and chimps differ by about 60 million base pairs.

7. The difference between humans and a common ancestor with chimps would be about 30 million base pairs.

8. Evolution of man occured over 8 million years, involving 350,000 to 400,000 generations, in an estimated population of about 10,000 individuals.

Not even close to one trillion births would have occurred during that entire timeframe. Therefore it is improbable that a single specific mutation could have occurred during that entire time period. If you look at Lenski's work, he achieved one beneficial mutation in asexually reproducing bacteria after 31,500 generations. THat is hardly convincing evidence of evolution, given that man supposedly aquired 30 million benefitical mutations in 350,000 to 400,000 generations.

I know what your canned retort will be...."but evolution doesn't reqauire specific mutations"... Yes it does... because it is directional. Random mutations cannot produce order and functionality. That is a self-evident fact.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#124072 Mar 19, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Fine, he also believed the theory of evolution. You really should not cite someone who would disagree with every single one of your attempts at an argument.
We were talking specifically about atheism. Christine said that she "knew" that God did not exist. I merely pointed out that she was calling Einstein a moron.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#124073 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I can reference all of this if you have doubts....
1. The probability of a specific point mutation occurring at a specific site is about 1 in 2 billion births in humans and other higher mammals.
....
The chances of a leaf landing in a particular spot on the ground are about 1 in one trillion, yet ... leaves defy those odds billions of times each day.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#124074 Mar 19, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
The chances of a leaf landing in a particular spot on the ground are about 1 in one trillion, yet ... leaves defy those odds billions of times each day.
You've just disqualified yourself as having any understanding of mathematics. Where a leaf falls is random. DNA is not random.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#124075 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I can reference all of this if you have doubts....
1. The probability of a specific point mutation occurring at a specific site is about 1 in 2 billion births in humans and other higher mammals.
......
There are 6,000,000,000 base pairs (specific sites) in a human genome sequence.

Given a 1:2,000,000,000 chance of mutation at each site, that would be a certainty of mutation for each birth at least three times over.

Your reasoning is flawed right out of the gate.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124076 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>We were talking specifically about atheism. Christine said that she "knew" that God did not exist. I merely pointed out that she was calling Einstein a moron.
Okay, I came in on the middle of an argument.

That was still an How's That for Stupid false dichotomy.

Disagreeing with someone is not calling that person a moron.

I have not seen her post, but the odds are she may have said YOUR belief in God is moronic. And in that Einstein would agree with her.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124077 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You've just disqualified yourself as having any understanding of mathematics. Where a leaf falls is random. DNA is not random.
No, you have disqualified yourself at mathematics as shown by Oogah Boogah in the post that follows this quoted post.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#124078 Mar 19, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
There are 6,000,000,000 base pairs (specific sites) in a human genome sequence.
Given a 1:2,000,000,000 chance of mutation at each site, that would be a certainty of mutation for each birth at least three times over.
Your reasoning is flawed right out of the gate.
Human DNA is not a hodgepodge of random mutations. It is a sophisticated code with multiple levels of overlapping messages, data compression, intricate algorithms, etc.
Specific beneficial changes must occur to give natural selection a chance.
You can join Kittenkodder as a veritable moron.

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) 1 hr Paul Porter1 142,587
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr showmethemoney 171,799
evolution is correct. prove me wrong 2 hr Paul Porter1 9
Beware of Kamikaze Snakes. They Are Evolving in... 3 hr Paul Porter1 36
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 hr thetruth 20,593
News Intelligent design 15 hr Paul Porter1 3
News Pope Francis Affirms Evolution and Big Bang Theory Thu Paul Porter1 266
More from around the web