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.

Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128320 Apr 26, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> All good questions, but.....
The answer isn't because gawd did it.
http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Biological_Chemis...
What's that link about?
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128321 Apr 26, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it.
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Show us an AIG-sponsored creationism research article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Urb's link was about a creationist circle jerk "peer reviewed journal".
Nice to see evo-tards correct other evo-tards

Internal error correction
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128322 Apr 26, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
These proteins are not exact by any nature there are a myriad of "errors" or "variation" that do not affect the function of the protein. How is that in any way the result of a precise translation algorithm? DNA and RNA are molecules, they are not computer programs. Let's see you write some code that duplicates itself without outside intervention... I'll provide all the letters and numbers you need. Just have the code duplicate itself using the original code and the constituent symbols. I'll wait.
You started out well

But then have fallen into a little hole

Let me help you out

The reason DNA is 'special' is BECAUSE its a code that duplicates itself

==========
Are you denying that DNA codes for proteins?

And you you agreeing with Dr Sanford regarding genetic entropy?

Help me out, now

Because to my jaded ears it sounds like you're doing both

Proceed with caution.....

Rock fall ahead....
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128323 Apr 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Tyre was ALWAYS the island in the sea. The land based cities were never called Tyre in any form by either the locals or the Hebrews. The few articles that refer to "Paleo-Tyre" are talking about the land based city before Tyre was formed. Once Tyre was developed it quickly became the power of the area. The on shore city always had a different name. In fact Tyre's name tells you that it is an island if you do enough research.
You have lost every aspect of the Tyre prophecy debate.
No you have completely lost

Now you're asking me to ignore history, ignore the facts, ignore the scriptures and PRETEND with you that you are right

How was Tyre formed?

Show me that there is no Old Tyre

Show me that the Bible is wrong by demonstrating that Ezekiel has not said:

Ezekiel 26:7 “For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar[b] king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army.

8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you.

==========
8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland"
==========

What does that mean?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128324 Apr 26, 2013
Russell wrote:
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it.
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Nice to see evo-tards correct other evo-tards
Internal error correction
Lowell did not make a mistake.

He wanted something that Urb could not give him.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128325 Apr 26, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
No you have completely lost
Now you're asking me to ignore history, ignore the facts, ignore the scriptures and PRETEND with you that you are right
How was Tyre formed?
Show me that there is no Old Tyre
Show me that the Bible is wrong by demonstrating that Ezekiel has not said:
Ezekiel 26:7 “For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar[b] king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army.
8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you.
==========
8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland"
==========
What does that mean?
I have not ignored history. How Tyre was formed is not germane to the topic. I don't have to show you that there was no old Tyre, you have to show me that there was. All the evidence indicates that that was not the case. And it is up to the person making the positive claim to prove their point.

The Bible refers to Tyre as an island and not as a land based city.

History says that Tyre is an island and not a land based city.

The etymology of Tyre tells us that it is an island.

The only mention of "Paleo-Tyre" is by people who are referring to the city that gave birth to Tyre, they never ever implied that that's city was Tyre in any way.

I am asking you to look at history and scripture without a biased view and read it for what it says.

And at the end Squishy shows how he earned the nickname Squishy by shooting himself in the foot again.

We never denied that Nebby overran the land based cities, but his quote again shows the land based cities are not "Tyre", they are "your settlements".

Thanks for confirming your name again Squishy.
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128326 Apr 26, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Codes carry a message, unless you speak protein it can't be a code.
Binary is a code because 0-1 are symbols that stand as something else. Put together they form words that are commands. So binary is a code.
In DNA GATC stand for themselves guanine, adenine, thymine, cytosine.
DNA is referred to as code because it resembles one, but what it really is, is a blueprint in a chain of protein instructions. They carry no words , it would be random gibberish, but carries the instructions. So it resembles a code but is uniquely different. But
I do believe it is a deliberate set of instructions, it is a blueprint.
How did genetic drift and random mutation result in a quaternary triplet code with two epigenetic codes eg histosome and splicing codes?
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Not deliberate as someone designed it, deliberate because life built itself on it.
Is that because you say so, Batman

Or can you back this up?

Thanks
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Like a wall and each new thing added more bricks in the chain by replication.
No
Its nothing like a wall with bricks

DNA replicates, unlike a wall with bricks

It requires translation

It carries on itself the machinery for its own transcription and translation

This brings me back to this---->

How did genetic drift and random mutation result in a quaternary triplet code with two epigenetic codes eg histosome and splicing codes?
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128327 Apr 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>Lowell did not make a mistake.
He wanted something that Urb could not give him.
Yes

Complete acquiescence

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#128328 Apr 26, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
No you have completely lost
Now you're asking me to ignore history, ignore the facts, ignore the scriptures and PRETEND with you that you are right
How was Tyre formed?
Show me that there is no Old Tyre
Show me that the Bible is wrong by demonstrating that Ezekiel has not said:
Ezekiel 26:7 “For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar[b] king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army.
8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you.
==========
8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland"
==========
What does that mean?
Well tell us Rrrrrussell, what's your gawd gonna do about North Korea? I hope he has it all figured out, cause Kim Jong-un is just about a looney as he is.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128329 Apr 26, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes
Complete acquiescence
You don't seem to know the meaning of "acquiescence".
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128330 Apr 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I have not ignored history. How Tyre was formed is not germane to the topic. I don't have to show you that there was no old Tyre, you have to show me that there was. All the evidence indicates that that was not the case. And it is up to the person making the positive claim to prove their point.
The Bible refers to Tyre as an island and not as a land based city.
History says that Tyre is an island and not a land based city.
The etymology of Tyre tells us that it is an island.
The only mention of "Paleo-Tyre" is by people who are referring to the city that gave birth to Tyre, they never ever implied that that's city was Tyre in any way.
I am asking you to look at history and scripture without a biased view and read it for what it says.
And at the end Squishy shows how he earned the nickname Squishy by shooting himself in the foot again.
We never denied that Nebby overran the land based cities, but his quote again shows the land based cities are not "Tyre", they are "your settlements".
Thanks for confirming your name again Squishy.
What does this mean?

8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you.
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128331 Apr 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't seem to know the meaning of "acquiescence".
Total submission
...in the case at hand
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128332 Apr 26, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Well tell us Rrrrrussell, what's your gawd gonna do about North Korea? I hope he has it all figured out, cause Kim Jong-un is just about a looney as he is.
Hey Batman

You're back....

And still in the dark, I see

Are you the real Batman or a fake?

I think fake

The real Batman would have attempted to answer my question--->

How did genetic drift and random mutation result in a quaternary triplet code with two epigenetic codes eg histosome and splicing codes?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128333 Apr 26, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
What does this mean?
8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you.
Let's break it down for the hard of thinking:

"He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword."

This is obviously a prediction that Nebby, the "he" in the verse, will attack the land based cites that are associated with Tyre. Please note, nowhere does it imply that this is Tyre. Since Zeke knew Nebby was going to attack Tyre this was not much of a prediction.

"he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you." This obviously says that Nebby would attempt to attack the island. Where else would he need a ramp? Remember if you read this in context "he" definitely refers to Nebby, not to Alex.

So now I have answered your question how about the additional prediction by Zeke that Nebby would attack, which he did, and defeat, which he didn't, Egypt.

What do you think about the prediction that Nebby would attack Egypt and defeat her and yet he obviously didn't. It seems that Zeke's prophesies quite often were off the mark.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128334 Apr 26, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Total submission
...in the case at hand
No one submitted to anyone. You seem to be hallucinating.
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128335 Apr 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No one submitted to anyone. You seem to be hallucinating.
Nope

That's what evo-tards demand of us creationist Christians

Complete submission and the acceptance of lies eg evolutionism and now your arguments from fallacy about Ezekiel
Russell

Canberra, Australia

#128336 Apr 26, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's break it down for the hard of thinking:
"He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword."
This is obviously a prediction that Nebby, the "he" in the verse, will attack the land based cites that are associated with Tyre. Please note, nowhere does it imply that this is Tyre. Since Zeke knew Nebby was going to attack Tyre this was not much of a prediction.
"he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you." This obviously says that Nebby would attempt to attack the island. Where else would he need a ramp? Remember if you read this in context "he" definitely refers to Nebby, not to Alex.
So now I have answered your question how about the additional prediction by Zeke that Nebby would attack, which he did, and defeat, which he didn't, Egypt.
What do you think about the prediction that Nebby would attack Egypt and defeat her and yet he obviously didn't. It seems that Zeke's prophesies quite often were off the mark.
Let's narrow this down a little

Whose settlements does Ezekiel refer to on the mainland?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128337 Apr 26, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope
That's what evo-tards demand of us creationist Christians
Complete submission and the acceptance of lies eg evolutionism and now your arguments from fallacy about Ezekiel
Hardly.

We don't require submission. All we require is that people do real science. You are in no position to tell what is real science since you purposefully ignore key parts of science.

There are no lies of evolution. It is an open process, lies would be obvious. And I have made no arguments from fallacy about Zeke. You are the only one guilty of that. We have shown you how you try to take the verses out of context, you try to call cities that are not Tyre, Tyre. You try to extend the prophesy to the point of trivialization.

Real peer review keeps scientists honest. Creationists avoid it because they know their ideas are not honest.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128338 Apr 26, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's narrow this down a little
Whose settlements does Ezekiel refer to on the mainland?
They are Tyre's settlements. They are not Tyre itself. That is why even the Bible differentiates them. Once again the settlements are not Tyre.

Is that slow enough for you Squishy?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128339 Apr 26, 2013
By the way, even some of your sources acknowledge that those "settlements" had a name. It was either Usu or Ushu depending if you use the Phoenician name for them or the Egyptian name for them.

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 It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 3 hr marksman11 164,926
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 6 hr Frindly 3,243
No Evidence for Creation, a Global Flood, Tower... 7 hr Zog Has-fallen 39
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 9 hr Frindly 83,830
Ten Reason Why Evolution Is a Lie (Jul '09) 18 hr MIDutch 1,996
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Tue Regolith Based Li... 223,191
Time Dec 9 THANKS 2
More from around the web