Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 178688 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.

Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#126184 Mar 31, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
I admit I catch you lying a lot less that HTS. HTS simply cannot sit down and type without lying. He actually believes quote mining to be okay and we are nit picking when we call him on it.
That is the sort of people you have on your side.
Just because someone says things that you don't like, and to which you have no valid response, does not constitute lying on their part

Since: Mar 13

New Malden, UK

#126185 Mar 31, 2013
You don't teach kids in school that the easter bunny is real nor that Santa is real why do they continue to teach kids this crap about religion, it should be up to the parents to guide their offspring. But yes teach them about evolution
HTS

Williston, ND

#126186 Mar 31, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
what mechanism of evolution cannot be observed?
[Hint: we discovered these mechanisms by observation]
p.s. Gravity is just imagined to occur.
The creation of complexity through random mutations.
HTS

Williston, ND

#126187 Mar 31, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Gravity has no science behind it.
See, I can say things like that too. They are more true for gravity than evolution so actually I make the better argument.
Dogen, can't you come up with some actual science?
Your repetitive parroting of the same irrelevant analogy is getting annoying.
I know it's become fashionable to compare evolution to gravity, but the comparison is asinine.
There's a difference...
Gravity is observed.
Evolution is not.
Rather than simply swallow all of the BS on talkorigins, I suggest that you for once engage in scientific study and logic.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#126188 Mar 31, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
The creation of complexity through random mutations.
What do you mean by "complexity"?

You try to hide your bullshit by using undefined terms.

And you also lie by only mentioning halve of the driving force of evolution. You would be right if it was random mutations alone, but you know it is variation along with natural selection that drives evolution. It is exceedingly dishonest to leave out one of the two driving forces.

We know that selection and variation can add new traits. It has been observed in nature and in the lab. Its history in the past show up in the DNA genome and in the fossil record.

So in what way do you mean that evolution cannot add "complexity"?
HTS

Williston, ND

#126189 Mar 31, 2013
Loki101 wrote:
You don't teach kids in school that the easter bunny is real nor that Santa is real why do they continue to teach kids this crap about religion, it should be up to the parents to guide their offspring. But yes teach them about evolution
Why would you support teaching evolution in science classes?
Evolution has no more validity than the theory of the Easter bunny or Santa Claus.
The scientific method is trashed, probability concepts perverted, and ridiculous unwarranted extrapolations accepted without scrutiny.
Worst of all, data is systematically filtered, which constitutes scientific fraud.

In the end, the entire theory of evolution relies on the dogma: Regardless of the complexity, evolutiondidit with pixie dust.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#126190 Mar 31, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Dogen, can't you come up with some actual science?
Your repetitive parroting of the same irrelevant analogy is getting annoying.
I know it's become fashionable to compare evolution to gravity, but the comparison is asinine.
There's a difference...
Gravity is observed.
Evolution is not.
Rather than simply swallow all of the BS on talkorigins, I suggest that you for once engage in scientific study and logic.
It is clearly meant to.

Perhaps he will quit when you see that it is not an irrelevant analogy.

And lying does not help your case. Once again evolution is observed in the laboratory, in the field, in the fossil record, in the genome, and in dozens of different phylogenic trees.

The reason that evolution is observed in so many different places is one of the reasons that it is considered to be just as much of a fact as gravity is.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#126191 Mar 31, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you support teaching evolution in science classes?
Evolution has no more validity than the theory of the Easter bunny or Santa Claus.
The scientific method is trashed, probability concepts perverted, and ridiculous unwarranted extrapolations accepted without scrutiny.
Worst of all, data is systematically filtered, which constitutes scientific fraud.
In the end, the entire theory of evolution relies on the dogma: Regardless of the complexity, evolutiondidit with pixie dust.
Now you must know that you are lying. Even the conservative judge at the Dover trial knew by the end of the trial that evolution is science and ID is not.

You can repeat your lies as much as you like, you are not making Jesus happy.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#126192 Mar 31, 2013
And HTS, how are you going to recognize "real science" when you can't even recognize scientific evidence?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#126193 Mar 31, 2013
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>Asherah is a pagan tree god and I believe in the living God of Abraham. Lilith was Adams first wife and Eve was his daughter. Just because someone doesn't agree with you and tries to enlighten you doesn't make them crazy.

I know who Adams first wife was. You think I was born yesterday and believe that P.C. Eve crap? Eve was not their daughter.

Asherah was the consort of YHWH, AKA the God of Abraham.......

http://news.discovery.com/history/religion/go...

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

"In a nutshell, the hub-bub is about certain archaeological finds (most notably Kuntillet Ajrud and Khirbet el-Qom) bearing inscriptions that mention Yahweh by name and “his asherah”(or, more accurately,“asheratah”). The conclusion is drawn that Yahweh had a wife. But matters are far more complicated than that. Here are the options."

http://michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/2011/03...

The quote and last reference link are more for fun than serious theology.


You DO know these are just old stories, right?

They are stories with meaning in them, not literal history.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#126194 Mar 31, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Well put, HTS
Its his bible alright
I suspect he has printed off a copy of the whole site and carries it around with him like a security blanket of sorts
He probably has several copies of what he thinks are the "good bits"....
These he keeps under his pillow, no doubt
Which is why he is forced to sleep bolt upright
....and also why he is frazzled each morning and half asleep all day long

To date I have seen many creationist take pot shots at talkorigins, but they come up empty when it comes to disputing its science.

Try that and I will take you more serious.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#126195 Mar 31, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because someone says things that you don't like, and to which you have no valid response, does not constitute lying on their part

No, I have DEMONSTRATED HTS to be lying on to many occasions.

He does not consider quote mining (aka lying) to be lying.



Valid responses are not the issue. Even when he is telling the truth he is a babbling idiot and refuting him is easy peasy. I have even seen him refute himself, which is an amusing creationist version of the hat trick.


“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#126196 Mar 31, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
The creation of complexity through random mutations.

As "complexity" has been shown to be about as real as flying unicorns, even random mutation is overkill.

BTW, you are still using a straw-man version of evolution ("random mutations").

Why not try to say something intelligent or something you can support. Try to challenge me for a change. You can play with your little circle-jerk buddies some other time.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#126197 Mar 31, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Dogen, can't you come up with some actual science?

Can you recognize actual science? Since the answer is obvious I really don't see the point.

Your repetitive parroting of the same irrelevant analogy is getting annoying.

I know it's become fashionable to compare ID to evolution, but the comparison is asinine.

There's a difference...

Evolution is observed.

ID is not.

Rather than simply swallow all of the BS on creation.com I suggest that you for once engage in scientific study and logic.

If you are capable of it.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#126198 Mar 31, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you support teaching evolution in science classes?
Evolution has no more validity than the theory of the Easter bunny or Santa Claus.
The scientific method is trashed, probability concepts perverted, and ridiculous unwarranted extrapolations accepted without scrutiny.
Worst of all, data is systematically filtered, which constitutes scientific fraud.
In the end, the entire theory of evolution relies on the dogma: Regardless of the complexity, evolutiondidit with pixie dust.

Why would'nt you support teaching evolution in science classes?

Creationism has no more validity than the theory of the Easter bunny or Santa Claus.
The scientific method is trashed, probability concepts perverted, and ridiculous unwarranted extrapolations accepted without scrutiny.
Worst of all, data is nonexistent, which constitutes fraud.

In the end, the entire notion of creationism relies on the dogma: Regardless of the science, god done it with magic poofing.
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

#126199 Mar 31, 2013
You're forgetting that God the Lord is a woman and there is no sex in heaven, God doesn't have a mistress and is not gay. Eve was Adams daughter, she was called woman because she was taken out of man, from his side. You probably just want to blame Eve for the apple incident when it was Adam that talked her into it.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#126200 Mar 31, 2013
susanblange wrote:
You're forgetting that God the Lord is a woman and there is no sex in heaven, God doesn't have a mistress and is not gay. Eve was Adams daughter, she was called woman because she was taken out of man, from his side. You probably just want to blame Eve for the apple incident when it was Adam that talked her into it.

Does anyone know where I can get a butterfly net?

I tried craigslist.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#126201 Mar 31, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
I think I have another contender for my list, "Reasons Why Evolution Never Happened". Let's see if it passes muster.
This is in regards to toolmaking that archaeologists find. We are expected to accept that the earlier stone implemnets that are rocks fashioned into a point date from 2.6 million years ago and that only after 2 million plus years or more, they only advanced to later shapes with edges? This does not seem to match what is observed in all of human history with regards to innovation and ingenuity, in any stretch of the imagination. After 50,000 generations, they were only able to go from early stone tools to middle stone age tools? There is nothing in recorded human history that would support such an assertion.
(Not to mention that even in evolutionary terms, there were numerous creatures with extrememly advanced systems for defense, predation, disguise, deception, partnerships, language, navigation, etc.?)
But early humans (supposedly the most advanced species in terms of evolution) spent over 2 million years and went through 50,000 generations and only managed to advance from stone tools with a tip to stone tools with an edge?
That makes no sense whatsover!
So, you're saying technological advancements didn't proceed according to your personal version of how they should have happened, therefore evolution never happened.

How many times do I have to say this? The universe is not obligated to conform itself to your ignorance.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#126203 Mar 31, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Neither evolution nor ID should be taught as science. Both are religion.
Every mechanism of evolution is not empirically observable in nature. How can you make such a statement?
Evolution is imagined to occur.
So, "imagine" something that explains the evidence better. I guarantee everyone will listen ... unless it starts with "Goddit with pixie dust".

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#126204 Mar 31, 2013
susanblange wrote:
You're forgetting that God the Lord is a woman and there is no sex in heaven, God doesn't have a mistress and is not gay. Eve was Adams daughter, she was called woman because she was taken out of man, from his side. You probably just want to blame Eve for the apple incident when it was Adam that talked her into it.
Darth Vader was Luke's real father, and Gollum was originally a hobbit-like fellow called Smeagol who murdered his brother. The moral of the Star Belly Sneech story by Dr. Seuss is an anti-racist one. Achilles was the son of the river goddess Thetis who tried to make him invincible by dipping him in the river Styx as a baby, but she forgot the bit of his ankle covered by her own hand.

Blah blah blah.

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
Beware of Kamikaze Snakes. They Are Evolving in... 32 min Chimney1 79
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 32 min ChromiuMan 173,385
The Definition of a Creationist Scientist 2 hr Zog Has-fallen 119
What Motives Created Social Darwinism? 3 hr Zog Has-fallen 97
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 18 hr Chimney1 143,899
Darwinism: Science or Philosophy? 21 hr Zog Has-fallen 55
Is the Evolutionary theory mathematically prove... Fri Chimney1 134
More from around the web