Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180279 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 Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#124120 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to think that millions of years is the panacea for overcoming all improbabilities. You don't have "infinite" time. If man evolved from apes, at most 400,000 generations were available to create and incorporate millions of favorable mutations. Have you ever critically looked at the math?

Humans ARE apes.

So we have not evolved FROM apes.

Wrap your head around it.

Then define "divergent evolution".
One way or another

United States

#124121 Mar 19, 2013
http://www.ted.com/conversations

UC, you might like it as well. I'm there part time, but you have to give your rightful name.
One way or another

United States

#124122 Mar 19, 2013
HTS and UC, those subjects could be lengthened quite a bit, I hope you expand upon them.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#124123 Mar 19, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
You should keep a record of the new thinking you bring. Even what seems small is also new. It will matter and thanks for the new thoughts.
Actually, he probably wont bother because its just the recycled garbage spouted years ago by Sanford and its already been refuted.

But I am sure its all new to you.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#124124 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
. The geneticist Dr. J. C. Sanford stated that "no nucleotide is ever inherited independently. Each nucleotide is intimately connected to its surrounding nucleotides..."*
*Sanford, J.C., Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, Third Edition, 2005, p. 54

Might have been an accident, but Sanford is actually right about this. This must be the 'broken clock' phenomena I have heard about.

But this is still a canard. No one states that nucleotides are inherited independently, now do they? Hopefully you understand this better than Sanford.

I would also consider Sanford to be a FORMER geneticist. A geneticist is a scientist. Sanford sold his soul to pseudoscience.

Proof:
Sanford, J.C., Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, Third Edition, 2005

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#124125 Mar 19, 2013
One way or another wrote:
HTS and UC, those subjects could be lengthened quite a bit, I hope you expand upon them.

There is no end to pseudoscience but it never makes any progress, never makes any breakthroughs, never makes any difference to the larger world.
One way or another

United States

#124126 Mar 19, 2013
New thinking begets more new thinking. However, walking out on that limb is fraught with peril and ridicule. If it weren't, anyone could do it. Research is the key. Find what is not spoken of and speak to that.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#124127 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Human DNA is not a hodgepodge of random mutations.
No, its a rigorous, generation by generation life and death selection of 3 billion years of trial and error.

That is what evolution states and has always stated. Random mutation is merely part of the mechanism.
One way or another

United States

#124128 Mar 19, 2013
Perhaps the moron has proof? Where did Sanford speak of seeds? Morons never care for intelligent thinking.
One way or another

United States

#124129 Mar 19, 2013
If the geneticists can't follow which genes change into other genes, then science is lying through its teeth.

Bacteria have the built in ability to borrow and incorporate new genes, to create new functions. IE: from non antibiotic resistant, to, antibiotic resistant.

Do show where monkey, man, animal or plant genes do such.
One way or another

United States

#124130 Mar 19, 2013
Rigorous generation by generation, would leave a trail even a monkey could follow. Funny, science offers no such thing. Like counting from 1 to 100, science should be able to show the genetics flowing through each step, if evolutionism were real.

Too bad

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#124131 Mar 19, 2013
One way or another wrote:
Perhaps the moron has proof? Where did Sanford speak of seeds? Morons never care for intelligent thinking.
hahahahaha thats funny.

Sanford spoke at great length about seeds. He was involved with experiments in bombarding seeds with radiation in the hope of producing superior strains. It was his conclusions regarding the failure of that process that led him to hypothesise "inevitable genetic entropy" in the first place! He says as much himself.

But then, I have read his book, and you are just a third hand spouter of ignorance and hate filled stupidity. So what should I expect from you? Pretty much what I see.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#124132 Mar 19, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Humans ARE apes.
So we have not evolved FROM apes.
Wrap your head around it.
Then define "divergent evolution".
Rather than confront my challenge and look at the math, you predictably
blather on with meaningless distractions.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#124133 Mar 19, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Natural selection selects the whole organism - never the genes in the chromosomes. There is no certain correlation between the quality of fitness of the whole organism to the quality of the underlying genes. This also refutes the theory.
WTF???? Of course the whole organism is selected. And its genes with it. No correlation? You're nutty.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#124134 Mar 19, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the stupidest thing I have seen from you.
Agreed. Uber-stupid.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#124135 Mar 19, 2013
One way or another wrote:
If the geneticists can't follow which genes change into other genes, then science is lying through its teeth.
Your bitterness, your ignorance of science, and your arrogance all condensed into a single statement of utter, unbeatable, insufferable and vile stupidity.

Well done. You have reached your personal apex. This is the best you will ever be.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#124136 Mar 19, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>What UC is saying is that natural selection can't select a beneficial nucleotide. It must select a phenotype of over 6 billion nucelotides. Survival of the fittest is an abstract concept that doesn't remotely reflect reality. When seeds fall to the ground. The genetically superior seeds will not reproduce more than any other seed, because it is almost exclusively environmental factors (soild quality, etc.) that determine reproductive success. Also, genetically inferior seeds will not be preferentially eaten by predators. So this whole notion of natural selection is nothing more than a bedtime story.
Also uber-stupid. Well done.

If genetically inferior seeds glowed in the dark, they Could be preferentially eaten by predators, dumbass.

You really don't understand any of this, do you?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#124137 Mar 19, 2013
One way or another wrote:
New thinking begets more new thinking. However, walking out on that limb is fraught with peril and ridicule. If it weren't, anyone could do it. Research is the key. Find what is not spoken of and speak to that.
It is possible to discover new absurdity. But the only way to real progress, so far has been science. You can change that by making technological breakthroughs based on religion.

I'll wait ......
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#124138 Mar 19, 2013
One way or another wrote:
HTS and UC, those subjects could be lengthened quite a bit, I hope you expand upon them.
Do you have to wear a dress and use Pom Poms for your current role?
HTS

Mandan, ND

#124139 Mar 19, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Your bitterness, your ignorance of science, and your arrogance all condensed into a single statement of utter, unbeatable, insufferable and vile stupidity.
Well done. You have reached your personal apex. This is the best you will ever be.
Chimney, you are a complete stranger to the scientific method. You have not provided one iota of scientific evidence. All you do is pontificate and blather on about our idiotic religion of atheism.
I present evidence, and you arrogantly dismiss it with one sweep, without logically justifying any of your points.
For once, why don't you post some actual evidence of the common descent of species. I'm not interested in your bedtime stories. I'm asking for scientific evidence.

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) 4 min Into The Night 51,336
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 9 min marksman11 157,326
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 37 min Regolith Based Li... 24,639
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 41 min Regolith Based Li... 218,714
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 1 hr ChromiuMan 1,117
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 7 hr Dogen 460
How did reproduction start for any living thing? 7 hr Dogen 90
More from around the web