Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180392 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

#124365 Mar 20, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Dr Robert Carter--> Marine biologist
http://creation.com/dr-robert-carter
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/8905048/multidi...
----------
Just for your general education--->
A Short List Of The Christian Founders Of Modern Science
http://www.creationsafaris.com/wgcs_toc.htm
Founders of Modern Science Who Believe in GOD – Tihomir Dimitrov
http://www.scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/v...
50 Nobel Laureates and other great scientists who believed in God by Tihomir Dimitrov
http://scigod.com/file/SGJ_V1 (3).pdf
And last but by no means least-->
http://atheismexposed.tripod.com/nobelistsgod...
Now the real challenge, produce a peer reviewed, scientific paper, published by him, that actually opposes evolution.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124366 Mar 20, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
You cite it, but obviously you did not read it.
from the cited article:
" it is probably a bad idea
to become so preoccupied with the creationists that you end up let-
ting them dictate the scientific agenda..."
" As noted earlier, some science deserves to be
rejected—if nothing else, the history of our field shows
that. Consequently, the problem with creationists is not
that they reject science, but that they reject science that
they should not be rejecting.
Interesting opinion article on cultural anthropology. Not relevant to the fact of evolution at all.
Oh
I have read it all right....

Scientific racism is alive and well

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#124367 Mar 20, 2013
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124368 Mar 20, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, you can't refute anything nor provide evidence so you try the old hand wave technique.
Scientists do agree on evolution. The number of professional scientists that are creationists would not fill up one state mental hospital.
There are more Ph.D scientist in the U.S who have a diagnosis of Schizophrenia than who support creationism.
Think about that.
You can pretend it isn't the truth, but everyone knows.
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
This is both a clear truth and an outrageous lie.
Scientists disagree about few of the basics. It is at the cutting edge where they disagree.
In a room full of random scientists they will all agree gravity exists.
They will disagree on if there is more than one type of Higgs boson.
They will agree evolution happens. They will disagree on the prorating of the mechanisms.
They will agree that blacks holes exist. They will disagree on if information can survive transit across the Schwarzschild radius.
You are beginning to sound like one sick puppy yourself....

Sorry mate

Everything you say is lame

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124369 Mar 20, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh
I have read it all right....
Scientific racism is alive and well
You can claim that all you like but the refusal of creatards to even attempt to show any says that no one really believes it.

Creatards know better than anyone else that they are trying to peddle a barrel of shit.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124370 Mar 20, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
They are not in the same family, genus or species.
Coelacanthus pencillatus: "They bear a superficial similarity to the living Latimeria, though they were smaller, and had more elongated heads. Individuals grew up to 3 feet in length, and had small lobed fins, suggesting that Coelacanthus were open-water predators.
Coelacanthus was a long-lived genus with a worldwide distribution. They survived the Permian–Triassic extinction event, and eventually died out during the Late Jurassic, around 145 million years ago."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanthus
Don't lecture me with rubbish

I don't need ejjerkating...

I detest the Wiki

So they are essentially the same animal

Why were they given a different genus and species name?

I know...

No reason at all

----
Gulf Shrimp today---> named Litopenaelis setiferus
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...

There you go--> Wiki for you

Identical to

Fossil shrimp from Solnhofen--->same layers as Archeopteryx fossils were found
Named -->Antrimpos speciosus
There you go--> Wiki for you

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Antrim...
----------

Pencil Sea Urchin
From Virgin Islands St Thomas
Living creature is Named -->Eucidaris tribuloides

Fossil is named---> Hemicidaris intermedia
http://www.diomedia.com/imagePreview/01ACGTQ2...

They're identical

----------

But wait....there's more.....

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124371 Mar 20, 2013
Oh FSM!... Now Rusty thinks he is an expert on shrimp.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124372 Mar 20, 2013
From the Great Barrier Reef
Living creature--->Fungia fungites

Fossil from dinosaur layers named--->
Cyclolites undulate

They're identical
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124373 Mar 20, 2013
Dragon fly-->

Living dragon fly --->named Pachypiplax

Fossil from same rock layers as dinosaurs named --> urogomphus

They’re identical
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124374 Mar 20, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I was a bit lazy, Dumb would be you.
That article debunks itself by the title alone.
The fact that you do not like how a science has been misused by some in no way debunks the science. If you are going to apply those standards to evolution then Christianity is dead more than ten times over since thousands if not millions of people all over the world have been guilty of that in far worse ways than evolution has ever been abused.
It is wishful thinking on your part alone that you are trying to debunk evolution with now.
In other words you have gotten dumber and dumber.
Heavens....
I did not realize how deeply troubled you are

Jonathan Marks is a biological anthropologist of some repute

----------
And you're quite lazy and quite dumb
----------

Christianity is not responsible for anywhere near the number of deaths directly attributable to atheism and evolution

Since you have a fascination for moving pictures:



----------

If You Thought Religion was a Bad Idea … Check Out Atheism – Kirk Durston – June 2012

"To summarize why purely atheistic societies are so dangerous, they not only killed for the cause of advancing a purely atheistic society, but their moral guardrail has no grounds. Thus, extraordinary democide can result, because a portable, hand carried moral guardrail is no guardrail at all."

http://powertochange.com/wp-content/uploads/2...

----------

The unmitigated horror visited upon man, by state sponsored atheism, would be hard to exaggerate,,, Here’s what happens when Atheists/evolutionists/non-Chr istians take control of Government:

“169,202,000 Murdered: Summary and Conclusions [20th Century Democide]

I BACKGROUND
2. The New Concept of Democide [Definition of Democide]
3. Over 133,147,000 Murdered: Pre-Twentieth Century Democide
II 128,168,000 VICTIMS: THE DEKA-MEGAMURDERERS
4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill
6. 20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State
7. 10,214,000 Murdered: The Depraved Nationalist Regime
III 19,178,000 VICTIMS: THE LESSER MEGA-MURDERERS
8. 5,964,000 Murdered: Japan’s Savage Military
9. 2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State
10. 1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey’s Genocidal Purges
11. 1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
12. 1,585,000 Murdered: Poland’s Ethnic Cleansing
13. 1,503,000 Murdered: The Pakistani Cutthroat State
14. 1,072,000 Murdered: Tito’s Slaughterhouse
IV 4,145,000 VICTIMS: SUSPECTED MEGAMURDERERS
15. 1,663,000 Murdered? Orwellian North Korea
16. 1,417,000 Murdered? Barbarous Mexico
17. 1,066,000 Murdered? Feudal Russia”

This is, in reality, probably just a drop in the bucket. Who knows how many undocumented murders there were. It also doesn’t count all the millions of abortions from around the world.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion.... Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
(Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. 1854), Vol. IX, p. 229, October 11, 1798.)

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124375 Mar 20, 2013
Johnathan Marks is a biological anthropologist, his repute is definitely in question.

And even smart people can write stupid articles at times, as he did. That article was filled with quite a bit of wishful thinking, in other words it is not very scientific at all.

Your next article makes some very serious mistakes. By their definition they screwed up. Many of their so called "atheist atrocities" were "Christian atrocities". Without even trying I can swing the total by over 42 million.

And I am betting that I can find a total of over 100 million that the writer of that article was mistaken about.

To start, Hitler was a Christian not an atheist. Turkey probably has a Muslim leader not an atheist.

If Rusty would promise to go away I would find more.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124376 Mar 20, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
Johnathan Marks is a biological anthropologist, his repute is definitely in question.
And even smart people can write stupid articles at times, as he did. That article was filled with quite a bit of wishful thinking, in other words it is not very scientific at all.
Your next article makes some very serious mistakes. By their definition they screwed up. Many of their so called "atheist atrocities" were "Christian atrocities". Without even trying I can swing the total by over 42 million.
And I am betting that I can find a total of over 100 million that the writer of that article was mistaken about.
To start, Hitler was a Christian not an atheist. Turkey probably has a Muslim leader not an atheist.
If Rusty would promise to go away I would find more.
OK
Do it..

Let's see your research Bud

By the way

Hitler was no more a Christian in the sense of being a follower of Christ than I am a burger by virtue of being in McDonalds'

Historians have long accepted and indicated that Hitler was an evolutionist

The Nazis even planned to exterminate Christianity

http://creation.com/nazis-planned-to-extermin...

Gee

You know very little, eh SZ?

Lazy, dumb and backing a losing horse....

AND you've named yourself "mud"...

It's so hilarious!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124377 Mar 20, 2013
Rusty tends to list his numbers extremely poorly. His number 3. and 4. are actually totals of the numbers below.

So his first "real" claim was that of 61,9111,000 supposedly dead in the Soviet Gulag system. Now since this number is larger than the number of people that were ever prisoners of the Soviet Gulag system I found it very hard to believe. A study of Russian records shows the number was 1,053,829, but since many people were released when they were about to die there were estimated up to 1.6 million people who died in the gulags.

Hey, I am already over 100 million people. Taking the errant 60 million that Rusty claimed, the 22 some million attributed to atheists by Rusty's author or by Rusty himself and attributed to Christians that is a swing of over 100 million. And I only checked two of the source that he gave.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#124378 Mar 20, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
OK
Do it..
Let's see your research Bud
By the way
Hitler was no more a Christian in the sense of being a follower of Christ than I am a burger by virtue of being in McDonalds'
Historians have long accepted and indicated that Hitler was an evolutionist
The Nazis even planned to exterminate Christianity
http://creation.com/nazis-planned-to-extermin...
Gee
You know very little, eh SZ?
Lazy, dumb and backing a losing horse....
AND you've named yourself "mud"...
It's so hilarious!
No true Scotsman fallacy. He was a christian, he followed the religion, and even used it to justify his crimes.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124379 Mar 20, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
OK
Do it..
Let's see your research Bud
By the way
Hitler was no more a Christian in the sense of being a follower of Christ than I am a burger by virtue of being in McDonalds'
Historians have long accepted and indicated that Hitler was an evolutionist
The Nazis even planned to exterminate Christianity
http://creation.com/nazis-planned-to-extermin...
Gee
You know very little, eh SZ?
Lazy, dumb and backing a losing horse....
AND you've named yourself "mud"...
It's so hilarious!
You can deny that Hitler was not a Christian but the evidence and Hitler's own statements prove you wrong. He claimed to be a Catholic to the end, and the last time I checked Catholics were considered to be Christians. He persecuted atheists. Not as badly as he persecuted the Jews, but being openly atheists would get you into the concentration camps.

You are guilty of the "No true Scotsman fallacy":https://yourlogi calfallacyis.com/no-true-scots man
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124380 Mar 20, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
How about the fact that it is:
Observable
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Testable
How and where has this ever happened?

Please don't say Lenski

I am quite unimpressed with your "science"

I will surely burst into tears with utter compassion and sorrow for you if you say Lenski...
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
falsifiable
No
You're wrong....

Keep trying tho'
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Replicable,.......
Never

Its never happened and never will

Go ahead and design an experimental protocol where you can achieve this...

Let's see it..
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words it is science.
Magic poofing has no evidence.
No sadly......for you

Evolution just ain't science...

Repeating this sad little mantra does not make it so....

What do you chant in Buddhism?

What you wrote above is the evo-chant....

Gets a bit grating after a while..

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124381 Mar 20, 2013
Remember Rusty's idiot statement that 60 some million died in the Soviet Gulag system? That would be rather difficult when only 18 million passed through the Gulags.

Rusty is a typical idiot who will believe any numbers that seem to support him. The more they support him the better they seem to him.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13717...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124382 Mar 20, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
OK
Do it..
Let's see your research Bud
By the way
Hitler was no more a Christian in the sense of being a follower of Christ than I am a burger by virtue of being in McDonalds'
Historians have long accepted and indicated that Hitler was an evolutionist
The Nazis even planned to exterminate Christianity
http://creation.com/nazis-planned-to-extermin...
Gee
You know very little, eh SZ?
Lazy, dumb and backing a losing horse....
AND you've named yourself "mud"...
It's so hilarious!
Creatard.com is a know lying site. If they publish an article it is automatically assumed not to be true.

Why do Christians want to distance themselves from Hitler? They got along so well during WWII?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#124383 Mar 20, 2013
What is even more hilarious is that Rusty only read the title of the article.

There was no attempt, even according to Rusty's article from a very dubious source, to exterminate Christianity. All it claims that Hitler did was to go after a few pastors that opposed his reign. There was no attempt to "exterminate Christianity".
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#124384 Mar 20, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Creatard.com is a know lying site. If they publish an article it is automatically assumed not to be true.
Why do Christians want to distance themselves from Hitler? They got along so well during WWII?
Killing people is not consistent with Christianity
So, stop being daft

Creation.com is just fine

Stop being a bigot

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 Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 4 min yehoshooah adam 3,560
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 7 min The RED X Sniper 67,588
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 41 min The RED X Sniper 221,398
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr marksman11 161,004
News Defending the Faith: Intelligent design vs. 'Go... 3 hr Uncle Sam 418
Curious dilemma about DNA 5 hr Subduction Zone 437
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 11 hr Eagle 12 28,712
More from around the web