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

#128382 Apr 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No it isn't. You clearly forgot that Nebby did not enter Tyre.
Even if we trivialize the prophesy, in which case it is no longer a prophesy Alex did not make the island bare.
It was not the mainland settlements that were supposed to be wiped clean it was Tyre. The Bible differentiates between Tyre, which is always the island in the Bible and the mainland cites.
Can't you even read your own book of fairly tales?
The ancient island city is under water

http://www.mediterranean-geoarchaeology.com/U...

DROWNED is the term used in this geoarchaeological paper
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#128383 Apr 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
These people are scared to death of death. They know that they are nothing on this world and it frightens them that probably within 20 minutes of them being in the ground they will be forgotten. Probably happily or purposefully forgotten.
Not according to the Bible

Which you have failed to discredit

“The Edge”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Of Tomorow

#128384 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
How about you and I chat about my question first
Or are you in empathy wanting to assist SZ in his hopeless quest to discredit God's word?
Is this Bat-empathy?
Or Bat-distraction from the matter at hand?
You are a fruit cake, I feel sorry for you.
You have to lie and deny to perpetuate your fantasy, and will never become a whole person because half of you knows you're a gd liar.
If their is a god do you really think it needs you to lie for it every damn day? I'm not assisting SubZone you have been arguing this for two days so I looked at the map and a few articles out of curiosity. I found that you are a denier of science and a liar for religion and a liar period.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#128385 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree
The writings are referred to as a code breaking
http://www.amazon.com/Cracking-Codes-Rosetta-...
What codes are these?
Wind drifted sand?
Leaves billowing on the grass?
No as I have said
A code implies intelligence
Design
Is the shape of snowflakes a code? Are they designed? Do they indicate intelligence?
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#128386 Apr 27, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a fruit cake, I feel sorry for you.
You have to lie and deny to perpetuate your fantasy, and will never become a whole person because half of you knows you're a gd liar.
If their is a god do you really think it needs you to lie for it every damn day? I'm not assisting SubZone you have been arguing this for two days so I looked at the map and a few articles out of curiosity. I found that you are a denier of science and a liar for religion and a liar period.
Ad hominem attacks usually begin when the opponent has no argument

You lose Batman

Aka Aura Mithra

Aka Nimrod
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#128387 Apr 27, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Is the shape of snowflakes a code? Are they designed? Do they indicate intelligence?
You tell me

You're always bringing up snowflakes
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#128388 Apr 27, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a fruit cake, I feel sorry for you.
You have to lie and deny to perpetuate your fantasy, and will never become a whole person because half of you knows you're a gd liar.
If their is a god do you really think it needs you to lie for it every damn day? I'm not assisting SubZone you have been arguing this for two days so I looked at the map and a few articles out of curiosity. I found that you are a denier of science and a liar for religion and a liar period.
Why have you named yourself after a Greek goddess?

Batman???

Really!

Aura Mithra is better but equally detested by God
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#128389 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
I still don't see it
Please explain it again
From the beginning......
What's the point....?
How come I can't see the point of either the Dude....who has since departed this forum, as I predicted, after his little flutter.....or your's?
There must be a point....?
Otherwise why post anything.....
RUBBISH

You get the point perfectly well, it's just that when the failings of creation.com are laid out in front of you in black and white, you have no way of defending your continued insistence of using it as a scientific source.

However, rather than do the rational thing and admit this, you simply ignore the point and pretend you don't understand it, or other forms of prevarication .

Don't get me wrong, it's no more than I expect of you - it's just fun seeing you flap around in your denial like a lobotomised fish of a hook of facts.

Thanks for playing numbnutz.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

#128390 Apr 27, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it was. People live there today. You can see it on Google Maps. Type in "Tyre Lebanon" if you don't trust me.
I did. And all I saw was ruins and fishermen laying out their nets. It's all over the internet. You've got to be lying at this point. Did you think you'd get away with this? Did you really think that you'd be the one to overturn this fulfilled prophesy after thousands of years of people dedicating their lives to it couldn't? What were you thinking?

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

North Miami Beach, FL

#128391 Apr 27, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
RUBBISH
You get the point perfectly well, it's just that when the failings of creation.com are laid out in front of you in black and white, you have no way of defending your continued insistence of using it as a scientific source.
However, rather than do the rational thing and admit this, you simply ignore the point and pretend you don't understand it, or other forms of prevarication .
Don't get me wrong, it's no more than I expect of you - it's just fun seeing you flap around in your denial like a lobotomised fish of a hook of facts.
Thanks for playing numbnutz.
Just what are your requirements for a "peer-reviewed" journal? I like to hear it. There is nothing that requires using people with widely differeing and even contrary perspectives. Journals such as "Evolution" certainly do not require the use of non-evolutionists!

The only reason most atheists read the Bible is to criticize and undermine its position. They have no interest in understanding it. So why should Creation Science journal choose reviewers who would approach it in the same manner?

Peer review in any setting is hardly unbiased. Humans are inherently biased. Occasionally articles are refuted later and this happens in both secular and Creation Science journals.

Many times, creation scientists have submitted articles to secular journals and everytime they are rejected. However, creation journals have accepted secular articles, and often reference secular reseach (Yes, evolutionary science hurts their own theory all by itself!).

Yes, Creation Science journals (and I agree) state their faith in the word of God and this is the foundation of our worldview. We are upfront and open about this. Although you won't find a secular journal that states their position on evolution or an old earth in plain language but they have never considered publishing the views of a creation scientist (not yet anyway). The evolutionist's statement of faith is implied in every article published on the subject; although they just don't like to admit that but have no problem readily and bolding containing specific anti-creation, anti-ID articles and declarations!

The fact is the creation science journals use the same peer review process as secular journals and the authors are every bit as qualified.

If you still have concerns you should write the Editor of such creation science journals, i.e, Creation Research Society Quarterly.
LowellGuy

United States

#128392 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope
It has not been answered at all
Providing me with a high school level link showing the structures and configurations of proteins does not 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?
----------
This has nothing to do with protein folding and 3-D configurations
==========
You're suggesting that chemicals write codes
Including the codes for their own translation
No translation. No code.
LowellGuy

United States

#128393 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
You tell me
You're always bringing up snowflakes
You're the one saying chemistry is a code.

“The Edge”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Of Tomorow

#128394 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Ad hominem attacks usually begin when the opponent has no argument
You lose Batman
Aka Aura Mithra
Aka Nimrod

It's not an ad hominem attack to tell the truth.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#128395 Apr 27, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
The fact is the creation science journals use the same peer review process as secular journals and the authors are every bit as qualified.
If you still have concerns you should write the Editor of such creation science journals, i.e, Creation Research Society Quarterly.
We're not concerned. That is because they publish their own BS in their own BS publications because they are incapable of passing peer-review. That is why you will notice they publish their science papers in actual science journals but publish apologetics to CRS.

“The Edge”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Of Tomorow

#128396 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Why have you named yourself after a Greek goddess?
Batman???
Really!
Aura Mithra is better but equally detested by God
You are a stupid liar now.
Mithra wasn't Greek and wasn't a woman.
But my handle has nothing to do with Mithra.
Not that it matters to me to inform you what it means I will anyway.
It means.

Are ah Myth ah In which Batman and god both are.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#128397 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure they can. They can't do "creation science" though, as that's an oxymoron:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/about/faith
"The scientific aspects of creation are important but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer, and Judge."
<quoted text>
Sooooo.....
Where's the point?
Isn't there meant to be a point...?
What is it....?
Over your head.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#128398 Apr 27, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The link works fine.
Of course it does.
Completely false.
You're either on drugs or just plum crazy. Maybe you are possessed.
Now who are we to listen to? Numerous top theologians and even leading scientists from major universities? Or a fringe lunatic atheist on Topix with an axe to grind?
But Urb, you don't listen to leading scientists from major universities...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#128399 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope
Just because someone can prove you wrong does not make them a liar
You're wrong
You've been shown to be wrong
And like dino osteocytes.....
You refuse to accept this
I never lie
Creotards do not need to lie
You are ignoring facts and history
And you are asking me to do the same
Squishy, he cannot prove me wrong.

And you are a creatard. That means you have been caught lying or are being purposefully ignorant. You lie by claiming there is no evidence for evolution when you know deep down that is all there is evidence for.

And as I have shown you are the one ignoring facts, history, and your God Damned Bible. So not only are you a liar. You are a blaspheming liar.

LOL, how can I make you ignore facts and history? That is one of the funniest charges that a creatard has ever made.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#128400 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope
It has not been answered at all
Providing me with a high school level link showing the structures and configurations of proteins does not 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?
----------
This has nothing to do with protein folding and 3-D configurations
==========
You're suggesting that chemicals write codes
Including the codes for their own translation
What code via what mechanism?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#128401 Apr 27, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope
Just because someone can prove you wrong does not make them a liar
You're wrong
You've been shown to be wrong
And like dino osteocytes.....
You refuse to accept this
I never lie
Creotards do not need to lie
Creotards always lie. You make Urb look honest, and Urb's a habitual liar.

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) 37 min Chimney1 143,907
The Definition of a Creationist Scientist 1 hr Chimney1 129
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 hr Aura Mytha 173,444
What exactly is life? Chimcal mix or more than ... 1 hr Chimney1 21
Beware of Kamikaze Snakes. They Are Evolving in... 14 hr Zog Has-fallen 82
What Motives Created Social Darwinism? 21 hr Zog Has-fallen 97
Darwinism: Science or Philosophy? Fri Zog Has-fallen 55
More from around the web