Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180369 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.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#127658 Apr 21, 2013
"The genetic code is the set of rules by which information encoded within genetic material (DNA or mRNA sequences) is translated into proteins (amino acid sequences) by living cells. Biological decoding is accomplished by the ribosome, which links amino acids in an order specified by mRNA, using transfer RNA (tRNA) molecules to carry amino acids and to read the mRNA three nucleotides at a time. The genetic code is highly similar among all organisms, and can be expressed in a simple table with 64 entries."

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

Even mainstream sources refer to DNA as a code. These "vodoo darwin zombees" on here are out in left field when it comes to even secular science. It meets every conceivable definition of a code; yet, they refuse to acknowledge that because it threatens their ideology.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#127659 Apr 21, 2013
What about bird evolution? What about Archaeopteryx? It perches like a bird and has feathers and wings capable of flight. So it is a bird. So then if Archaeopteryx is indeed a bird, then there really are NO Ancestors to Birds! If we have collected some half million bird and dinosaur fossils and science cannot even demonstrate a single reptile (or anything else) evolving into a bird, what does that say about bird evolution? Just like all the other animals I have discussed: thousands and thousands of them and not a single ancestor of a different kind. Why are the scales so radically tipped in favor of evolution? With evolution there is NO evidence; yet, the mainstream believes in it. All the evidence points to Creation yet we are thought by the secular community as wrong? Why is the world upside down?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127660 Apr 21, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
What does Ezekiel 26:3 say
Write it here
It says that Nebby will have allies. In fact the prophesy says that more than once. You are trying to take it out of context. That is not allowed. That is a form of lying.
Pompei has buildings and people
No one in their right mind would argue that ancient Pompeii has been rebuilt
Then why do you keep bringing it up as an example? Oh, that's right, because you are not in your right mind.
Write here what Ezekiel 26:3 states
Do it
Once again, it merely states that Nebby will have allies. It does not say Joe Schmoe will come down the pike in 300 years and defeat Tyre.

I see you could not find a major city in the area that was not defeated in that period of time. In other words your attempt to stretch time out makes the fact that Tyre got beaten eventually meaningless as far as prophecies go.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127661 Apr 21, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
"The genetic code is the set of rules by which information encoded within genetic material (DNA or mRNA sequences) is translated into proteins (amino acid sequences) by living cells. Biological decoding is accomplished by the ribosome, which links amino acids in an order specified by mRNA, using transfer RNA (tRNA) molecules to carry amino acids and to read the mRNA three nucleotides at a time. The genetic code is highly similar among all organisms, and can be expressed in a simple table with 64 entries."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_code
Even mainstream sources refer to DNA as a code. These "vodoo darwin zombees" on here are out in left field when it comes to even secular science. It meets every conceivable definition of a code; yet, they refuse to acknowledge that because it threatens their ideology.
Only because it is a handy descriptive term. It is not a code in the sense that creatards think it is a code.
Mugwump

London, UK

#127662 Apr 21, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>

The periodic table contains information
But it does not produce anything in its self
Except for molecules

So again,

What is the difference between the period table and DNA
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#127663 Apr 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
rusty was gone for a while. He probably has an extra large does of Stupid that he has to get out of his system.
Are you 7 or 8 years old? Shouldn't you be doing your homework? Do your parents know you're on the internet talking to adults?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127664 Apr 21, 2013
You can get the Bible to support anything if you quote mine it. In fact, I feel a little quote mine coming on myself:

Psalm 14 1 ".... There is no God.."

There you go, directly from the Bible.

rusty, how is what I just did any different from what you are trying to do?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127665 Apr 21, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you 7 or 8 years old? Shouldn't you be doing your homework? Do your parents know you're on the internet talking to adults?
Please, haven't you noticed when idiots like rusty, or you, get spanked very hard and very publicly that your kind tend to hide a day or two. Meanwhile the Stupid is bubbling and boiling in your blood. You can't help but to come back and to make the same idiotic mistakes all over again and hope that people don't notice this time around how wrong you are?

Are you going to defend rusty in his Tyre defense who said the city would never be rebuilt and then quoted an article that described how Tyre had been rebuilt?
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#127666 Apr 21, 2013
Do people realize that the rock layers where - right along side of - Archaeopteryx were found also had fossils of modern-appearing animals, such as sharks, guitar fish, horseshoe crabs, dragonflies, turtles, lizards, lobsters, crayfish, shrimp, cockroaches, woodwasps, waterbugs, grasshoppers, beetles, scorpian flies, water skeeters, sea urchins, sea stars, and prawns. All appearing as modern animals today. Do they REALIZE THIS? This tells me - obviously - that evolution did not occur. Archaeopteryx is just an extinct bird. What other conclusion is there?
Mugwump

London, UK

#127667 Apr 21, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
. All the evidence points to Creation yet we are thought by the secular community as wrong? Why is the world upside down?
Have asked this before but am hoping for a more rational answer.

Given your absolute proof (e.g. C14 dating) that that the creation account is correct and all of known science up to this point that contradicts it is wrong. How come science is so flawed in its method that it can't realise this and simply carries on based on its flawed assertions?

Is it all part of a atheist conspiracy (as suggested by HTS - ignoring the fact that many of faith disagree)

Is it all because scientists are stupid (as suggested by you - ignoring the fact that these are the people whom actually study this stuff)

Is it all because its a product of 'creation racist bigotry'(as suggested by Russell - ignoring the fact that it makes him sound like a school child stomping his feet)

So seriously UC, why does the majority of science disagree with your stance - and (understandably) make no comment on the existence or not of a creator ?
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#127668 Apr 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Please, haven't you noticed when idiots like rusty, or you, get spanked very hard and very publicly that your kind tend to hide a day or two. Meanwhile the Stupid is bubbling and boiling in your blood. You can't help but to come back and to make the same idiotic mistakes all over again and hope that people don't notice this time around how wrong you are?
Are you going to defend rusty in his Tyre defense who said the city would never be rebuilt and then quoted an article that described how Tyre had been rebuilt?
It was you who was spanked. The Biblical Tyre was utterly destroyed and will never be rebuilt. Prophesy fullfilled 100%. End of story. This is an excellent example and proof of the Bible's divine inspiration. Why can't you see that? Tyre was one of the most important cities in history! Here, read about it:

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.asp...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127669 Apr 21, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Do people realize that the rock layers where - right along side of - Archaeopteryx were found also had fossils of modern-appearing animals, such as sharks, guitar fish, horseshoe crabs, dragonflies, turtles, lizards, lobsters, crayfish, shrimp, cockroaches, woodwasps, waterbugs, grasshoppers, beetles, scorpian flies, water skeeters, sea urchins, sea stars, and prawns. All appearing as modern animals today. Do they REALIZE THIS? This tells me - obviously - that evolution did not occur. Archaeopteryx is just an extinct bird. What other conclusion is there?
Let's see a link please. Odds are you are lying or misinterpreting an unconformity.

There has been no discrepancies found between the fossil record and evolution. If that were the case the creatards would have trumpeted this news all over the world.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#127670 Apr 21, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Have asked this before but am hoping for a more rational answer.
Given your absolute proof (e.g. C14 dating) that that the creation account is correct and all of known science up to this point that contradicts it is wrong. How come science is so flawed in its method that it can't realise this and simply carries on based on its flawed assertions?
Is it all part of a atheist conspiracy (as suggested by HTS - ignoring the fact that many of faith disagree)
Is it all because scientists are stupid (as suggested by you - ignoring the fact that these are the people whom actually study this stuff)
Is it all because its a product of 'creation racist bigotry'(as suggested by Russell - ignoring the fact that it makes him sound like a school child stomping his feet)
So seriously UC, why does the majority of science disagree with your stance - and (understandably) make no comment on the existence or not of a creator ?
Skip the rhetoric and stick to the points. You're boring.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127671 Apr 21, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
What about bird evolution? What about Archaeopteryx? It perches like a bird and has feathers and wings capable of flight. So it is a bird. So then if Archaeopteryx is indeed a bird, then there really are NO Ancestors to Birds! If we have collected some half million bird and dinosaur fossils and science cannot even demonstrate a single reptile (or anything else) evolving into a bird, what does that say about bird evolution? Just like all the other animals I have discussed: thousands and thousands of them and not a single ancestor of a different kind. Why are the scales so radically tipped in favor of evolution? With evolution there is NO evidence; yet, the mainstream believes in it. All the evidence points to Creation yet we are thought by the secular community as wrong? Why is the world upside down?
Actually it does not perch like a bird. It does not have a reverse hallux.

In fact when it was thought to have had a reversed hallux many creatards said it had to be a bird because of that feature. Now that they have found it was assumed it had a reversed hallux and close investigation shows that not to be the case what are these creatards saying now?

It has both dinosaur and bird features. It is the perfect transitional form since people have argued back and forth which group it belongs in.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127672 Apr 21, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
It was you who was spanked. The Biblical Tyre was utterly destroyed and will never be rebuilt. Prophesy fullfilled 100%. End of story. This is an excellent example and proof of the Bible's divine inspiration. Why can't you see that? Tyre was one of the most important cities in history! Here, read about it:
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.asp...
People live in Tyre today.

It looks like creatards will go to almost infinite lengths to protect their mistaken views.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#127673 Apr 21, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's see a link please. Odds are you are lying or misinterpreting an unconformity.
There has been no discrepancies found between the fossil record and evolution. If that were the case the creatards would have trumpeted this news all over the world.
The whole fossil record is one big discrepency! We have been trumpeting this news all over the world!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127674 Apr 21, 2013
Urb, your pathetic apologetic article makes the same mistake all religious idiots make. It tires to claim that the Tyre that was not rebuilt is the land based city of Tyre. There was no land based city of Tyre, not at that time. Read the prophecy in context. Whenever it talks about Tyre it is talking about the island city. The land based cities are called "sister cities" or some other diminutive name. Those were not Tyre.

The city of Tyre is alive and healthy today.

The prophesy failed.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127675 Apr 21, 2013
Here check out this article. It completely destroys any and all arguments for the prophesy. It points out how the "ruins" preserved on the southern part of the island are Roman ruins, which means that the whole island has been rebuilt at one time or another. Tyre's power waxed and waned even after its defeat by Alexander the Great. It was never completely destroyed. It was never scraped into the sea. The island was never a bare rock for the spreading of nets.

The prophecy failed terribly:

http://etb-biblical-errancy.blogspot.com/2012...
Mugwump

London, UK

#127676 Apr 21, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Skip the rhetoric and stick to the points. You're boring.
Ok, will phrase it another way

'Why are you so convinced that you stance is right, in light of the fact that the overwhelming majority of people whom work in the relevant fields disagree with you (of whatever their faith)?'

And skip the hand waves - it is repetitive and boring

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127677 Apr 21, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The whole fossil record is one big discrepency! We have been trumpeting this news all over the world!
Then you should be able to find a peer reviewed article that supports your claim.

Until you do we know this statement of yours is a lie.

Creationists cannot explain the fossil record. It perfectly fits the evolutionary paradigm.

Why do you think you idiots keep losing in court?

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) 3 min 15th Dalai Lama 83,930
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 20 min 15th Dalai Lama 3,284
No Evidence for Creation, a Global Flood, Tower... 32 min 15th Dalai Lama 44
Time 2 hr Beagle 3
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 4 hr Genesis Enigma 164,943
Ten Reason Why Evolution Is a Lie (Jul '09) Wed MIDutch 1,996
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Tue Regolith Based Li... 223,191
More from around the web