Should evolution be taught in high school?

Feb 24, 2008 | Posted by: Cash | Full story: www.scientificblogging.com

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."
Comments
123,341 - 123,360 of 172,496 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126532
Apr 7, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Based on his statements, it is clear that Darwin accepted acquired characteristics as one of the mechancisms throughout his lifetime.
I never meant to say it his whole theory of evolution was overturned by the tail-cutting experiment but at least part (AC) of what Darwin thought responsible was.
You said Darwin rejected and even refuted acquired characteristics which couldn't be further from the truth. He stated in his Origins book that these were inherited and in a letter to his cousin he said he believed in it more than ever. It was only several years after his death that the tail-cutting experiment proved acquired characteristics wrong.
(If you thought I said it refuted Darwin's theory of evolution that it is not what I meant to say.) I meant to say it refuted acquired characteristics which should have been obvious. Sorry I called you names but you always start it don't you?
And I promise I won't scream went you go off on your one-trick-pony, nested hierarchies. I just ignore it because - no offense - it's just that it's inconsequential. It sounds good but has no real teeth in it. You need real evidence like fossils and observing macrochange happen. Real evidence. Not comparing similarities which by the way has also been proved wrong.
Why else do you not see "nested hierarchy" used as evidence in peer-reviewed research?
What you really need is fossils of direct ancestors for all plants or animals; what I need is plants and animal fossils first appearing fully formed: I win by a landslide. You need numerous beneficial genetic mutations creating new organs, tissues, function; I need the complete absense of same and evidence of genetic entropy and loss of information resulting in disease which I have a plethora of: I win.
Now moving onto "evolution" of Whales....
Exactly, and also why you will never find that Precambrian rabbit.
But you creationists still look for the crocoduck.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126533
Apr 7, 2013
 
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Dont you just wish things were easy and seamless in evo-world?
Instead of providing answers that you would just love to be true
".....the new dinosaur fossil has joined a growing list of fossil finds that just do not fit the evolutionary picture"
When we are talking about over 250 million years ago and can only rely on fossils , it is quite a puzzle to figure out.

But we have enough pieces of the puzzle to clearly see that evolution is a fact.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126534
Apr 7, 2013
 
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I looked at Appendix B, dinosaur evolution chart of Werner's "Evolution, the Grand Experiment" and its easy to see the flaw.
In my previous post, the evolution of Tyrannosauroids is discussed, along with the trends and changes occurring over many millions of years. Increase in size, reduction of the forelimbs and number of toes etc...but in the books chart, its just lumped the whole 78 specimens as "Tyrannosaurs" as if they were all the same and there was no progression. Its simply false.
That would be like throwing all the apes and hominid fossils we have together and saying that they are all the same thing, regardless of when dated, any trends, etc.
So of course there is no progression - if you ignore the progression!
What progression?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126535
Apr 7, 2013
 
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
When we are talking about over 250 million years ago and can only rely on fossils , it is quite a puzzle to figure out.
But we have enough pieces of the puzzle to clearly see that evolution is a fact.
Yes, the process of evolution left a spotty hole filled record. The problem for creationists is that the holes keep getting filled by fossils that fit the evolutionary paradigm and creationists have yet to come up with even a hypothesis that explains the fossil record from a creationist point of view.

In other words creationists have nothing and yet they still dare to complain about the evidence for evolution.

Can you say "hypocrite"?

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126536
Apr 7, 2013
 
Chimney1 wrote:
I looked at Appendix B, dinosaur evolution chart of Werner's "Evolution, the Grand Experiment" and its easy to see the flaw.
The chart is from the Chicago Field Museum. All the zeros marked on all the branches leading to the far right-hand side where all the dinosaurs are listed were provided by the experts themselves. Are you saying all the experts are wrong? That you have direct ancestor fossils that they don't know about? Come on man, give me a break.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126537
Apr 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, the process of evolution left a spotty hole filled record. The problem for creationists is that the holes keep getting filled by fossils that fit the evolutionary paradigm and creationists have yet to come up with even a hypothesis that explains the fossil record from a creationist point of view.
In other words creationists have nothing and yet they still dare to complain about the evidence for evolution.
Can you say "hypocrite"?
It's quite the opposite. We have everything and you have nothing. Every fossil ever found made its first appearance fully formed. If creation is true that is what we would expect. That's millions of fossils to our credit. What do you have? Not a single true transitional. A million to one in our favor.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126538
Apr 7, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
It's quite the opposite. We have everything and you have nothing. Every fossil ever found made its first appearance fully formed. If creation is true that is what we would expect. That's millions of fossils to our credit. What do you have? Not a single true transitional. A million to one in our favor.
Breaking the Ninth Commandment again.

So what is the testable hypothesis for creation?

What do you mean by that nonsense term "fully formed"? As others have pointed out you don't understand evolution and expect a crocoduck.

We have thousands of transitional fossils, you have a bias against them. What is wrong with the transitional fossils you have been linked to you countless times?
LowellGuy

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126539
Apr 7, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
It's quite the opposite. We have everything and you have nothing. Every fossil ever found made its first appearance fully formed. If creation is true that is what we would expect. That's millions of fossils to our credit. What do you have? Not a single true transitional. A million to one in our favor.
The "fully formed" bit is nothing more than a misrepresentation
of what evolution is.

“There is no such thing”

Level 3

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126540
Apr 7, 2013
 
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>when I was a kid there was this woman who lived in our town who cut her baby's head off and mounted it on the tip a shower curtain rod in her front yard for everybody to see. When the cops asked her why she did it she said, "Satan told me to do it!" I hope she's never allowed to be alone with little kids ever again.
Personally, I doubt that any kind of mental disease is curable, just treatable, manageable.
Want to see something interesting on that point?
Folie Deux
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126541
Apr 8, 2013
 
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
When we are talking about over 250 million years ago and can only rely on fossils , it is quite a puzzle to figure out.
But we have enough pieces of the puzzle to clearly see that evolution is a fact.
Perhaps you mean the puzzle of dino soft tissues?
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126542
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, the process of evolution left a spotty hole filled record. The problem for creationists is that the holes keep getting filled by fossils that fit the evolutionary paradigm and creationists have yet to come up with even a hypothesis that explains the fossil record from a creationist point of view.
In other words creationists have nothing and yet they still dare to complain about the evidence for evolution.
Can you say "hypocrite"?
Actually it was the process of rapid burial that left a fossil record

It is entirely consistent with creationism

It has not one iota of support for evolutionism.....NONE

Fully formed creatures

Total stasis

No ancestors

Just as predicted by the creation model
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126543
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Breaking the Ninth Commandment again.
So what is the testable hypothesis for creation?
What do you mean by that nonsense term "fully formed"? As others have pointed out you don't understand evolution and expect a crocoduck.
We have thousands of transitional fossils, you have a bias against them. What is wrong with the transitional fossils you have been linked to you countless times?
Where are your "thousands of transitionals"?

I've been bleating like an idiot for just ONE...for months and months..

All we have is stasis

Time and time and time and time again....STASIS

I have asked Chimney, which animals have actually evolved

All I got was stony silence

Like I got from you in regards to Adam and Eve being demonstrated as 'fly-in-your-face-Ayala' possible when HLA-DRB introns 1-4 are used

Just ignoring me...won't make me go away....SubDud

Your chicanery is quite transparent

Shreiking Borons could be years before they get their finger out and produce something that could even remotely help you....
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126544
Apr 8, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
What progression?
I absolutely second that

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126545
Apr 8, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
The "fully formed" bit is nothing more than a misrepresentation
of what evolution is.
Reality is a misrepresentation of what evolution is? Agreed!

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126546
Apr 8, 2013
 
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>Archaeology and history proves the bibles truthfulness and it has been remarkably well preserved. My God is the living God of Israel and I serve no other. Are you a Christian?
By your logic, Spiderman must be a real person. Try again.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126547
Apr 8, 2013
 
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Where are your "thousands of transitionals"?
I've been bleating like an idiot for just ONE...for months and months..
All we have is stasis
Time and time and time and time again....STASIS
I have asked Chimney, which animals have actually evolved
All I got was stony silence
Like I got from you in regards to Adam and Eve being demonstrated as 'fly-in-your-face-Ayala' possible when HLA-DRB introns 1-4 are used
Just ignoring me...won't make me go away....SubDud
Your chicanery is quite transparent
Shreiking Borons could be years before they get their finger out and produce something that could even remotely help you....
Archaeopteryx: bird or dinosaur?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126548
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it was the process of rapid burial that left a fossil record
It is entirely consistent with creationism
It has not one iota of support for evolutionism.....NONE
Fully formed creatures
Total stasis
No ancestors
Just as predicted by the creation model
And it's just a coincidence that there isn't a single human fossil found with dinosaur fossils. And, it's just a coincidence that there isn't a single trilobite fossil found with human fossils. And, it's just a coincidence that triceratops and rhinoceros fossils are never found together. And, it's just a coincidence that velociraptor and ostrich fossils are never found together. There's this "rapid formation" but there's zero mixing of these various types of animal fossils. What prohibited them from ever being mixed together? It can't be escaping some flood, because rhinos and certaopsians would have been similarly slow, and velociraptors and ostriches similarly swift. No, it needs to be something that actually explains the evidence. Oh, they never lived at the same time, and were separated by millions of years? That seems to fit the evidence. I guess we'll just have to disregard your nonsense and go with the scientific explanation instead. So sorry.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126549
Apr 8, 2013
 
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it was the process of rapid burial that left a fossil record
It is entirely consistent with creationism
It has not one iota of support for evolutionism.....NONE
Fully formed creatures
Total stasis
No ancestors
Just as predicted by the creation model
No, it isn't. Your problem is that you cannot explain the rapid burial and be logically consistent.

How did fossils get rapidly buried in the so called creation model?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126550
Apr 8, 2013
 
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Where are your "thousands of transitionals"?
I've been bleating like an idiot for just ONE...for months and months..
All we have is stasis
Time and time and time and time again....STASIS
I have asked Chimney, which animals have actually evolved
All I got was stony silence
Like I got from you in regards to Adam and Eve being demonstrated as 'fly-in-your-face-Ayala' possible when HLA-DRB introns 1-4 are used
Just ignoring me...won't make me go away....SubDud
Your chicanery is quite transparent
Shreiking Borons could be years before they get their finger out and produce something that could even remotely help you....
We have listed them many times over. It is not our fault that you are an idiot.

If you want to demand evidence you know what you have to do.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126551
Apr 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Archaeopteryx: bird or dinosaur?
Bird

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 4 min Lawrence Wolf 115,007
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr Dogen 136,240
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) 5 hr susanblange 292
Science News (Sep '13) 8 hr positronium 2,848
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 10 hr TedHOhio 165
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism Wed Zog Has-fallen 343
Natural Selection Not The Only Process That Dri... (Jan '14) Aug 25 reMAAT 20
When Will Evolutionists Confess Their Atheistic... (Feb '14) Aug 14 The Dude 1,831
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••