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 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129170 May 6, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Here is the evidence you speak of,
right in front your eyes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =pJOOo9C0dYEXX
Sorry, my bad. It was Aura Mytha who linked the video.

You should be able to get it off of this post.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129171 May 6, 2013
More from the same source.

This video is longer and it explains who examined what and how. This IS breaking edge stuff.

Thank you very much Aura!

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129172 May 6, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You blindly swallow whatever BS is fashionable. You "instant fame" suggestion is extremely naive. Anyone biologist who refutes evolution will be be ostracized. Here is an embarrassing confession by one of your own. M.J. Whitten, Ph.D, professor of Genetics at the University of Melbourne (Australia), observed,
"Biologists are simply naive when they talk about experiments designed to test the theory of evolution. It is not testable. They may happen to stumble across facts which would seem to conflict with its predictions. These facts will invariably be ignored and their discoverers will undoubtedly be deprived of continuing research grants."
*Professor Whitten (Professor of Genetics, University of Melbourne, Australia), 1980 Assembly Week address.
And we know this to be a lie or a quote mine. In other words this is a lie either way.

How do we know that it is a lie How's That for Stupid?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129173 May 6, 2013
Oops, I pulled a How's That for Stupid and did not link the video:



It is about a half hour long discussing why the fossils they have found support their claims.

This is exactly what you demand HTS, I suggest that you watch it.

Several times.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#129174 May 6, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You obviously know nothing about anatomy. You are blindly accepting dogma. I've asked you to explain why Lucy's pelvis proved it walked upright, and you continue to dodge the question. This is because you only believe whatever conforms to your religion.
The angle of human hips are different than any chimp or ape, because we walk upright, all other apes run along sort of using their hands also because the hip angle. The angle on Australopithecus is like human so we know it wasn't an chimp , they absolutely do not have this type bone structure. Another piece of evidence is in the thumbs.
Chimps thumb bones are different than human Australopithecus had human thumbs. The difference is Australopithecus was smaller and had a smaller brain, but it's brain case is more human than chimp.
It couldn't possibly been a chimp. There are no humans yet, so guess what it is? Deny it if you like, but it will do you no good.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#129175 May 6, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I have not dodged any of your questions. I told you to go to the experts in the field.
Did you see the video that Lowell linked? You will find your answers there.
I don't claim to know everything. It might seem to a fool like you that I am all wise and powerful, but I will be the first to admit that is not so.
But thanks for the compliment.
Yet another dodge.
Blindly posting a link proves nothing.
You haven't explained anything because you don't understand the foundation of what you believe in.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#129176 May 6, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>And we know this to be a lie or a quote mine. In other words this is a lie either way.
How do we know that it is a lie How's That for Stupid?
I see... another one of your canned retorts... the old reliable "quote mine" card, coupled with the "lying" accusation.
Pathetic....
HTS

Englewood, CO

#129177 May 6, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> The angle of human hips are different than any chimp or ape, because we walk upright, all other apes run along sort of using their hands also because the hip angle. The angle on Australopithecus is like human so we know it wasn't an chimp , they absolutely do not have this type bone structure. Another piece of evidence is in the thumbs.
Chimps thumb bones are different than human Australopithecus had human thumbs. The difference is Australopithecus was smaller and had a smaller brain, but it's brain case is more human than chimp.
It couldn't possibly been a chimp. There are no humans yet, so guess what it is? Deny it if you like, but it will do you no good.
Your parroted response proves nothing, because everything you say is subjective. Tell me what the angle of the pelvis is that defines a human pelvis and at what point it becomes an ape pelvis...
What do you means its brain case is more human than a chimp? How so? Do you have any clue as to the limits of morphologic variablity that exists in human skulls?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129178 May 6, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
I see... another one of your canned retorts... the old reliable "quote mine" card, coupled with the "lying" accusation.
Pathetic....
Yes, when you lie by quote mining I will gladly point it out.

And thanks for confirming that you lied by using a quote mine.

You know the rules. All quotes must have appropriate links. In all odds you probably copied and pasted the work of another quote miner. Passing on other people's lies when you know they are lying makes you a liar too.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#129179 May 6, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Your parroted response proves nothing, because everything you say is subjective. Tell me what the angle of the pelvis is that defines a human pelvis and at what point it becomes an ape pelvis...
What do you means its brain case is more human than a chimp? How so? Do you have any clue as to the limits of morphologic variablity that exists in human skulls?
http://anthro.palomar.edu/hominid/australo_2....

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fos...

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#129180 May 6, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>Oil exploration does not rely on any evolutionary suppositions. If the echinoderms to which you refer are a few thousand years old rather than hundreds of millions of years old, so what? All you are doing is speculatiing how old they are. That doesn't prove anything.
Wow, you deny everything that's in reality, don't you? Is this a habit or did you train for it?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129181 May 6, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Your parroted response proves nothing, because everything you say is subjective. Tell me what the angle of the pelvis is that defines a human pelvis and at what point it becomes an ape pelvis...
What do you means its brain case is more human than a chimp? How so? Do you have any clue as to the limits of morphologic variablity that exists in human skulls?
Now look at this hypocritical little turd.

When you provide him with a link to the experts that can properly explain it he accuses us of not understanding and blindly following. When the explanation comes, in this case, in Aura's own words the shitfaced weasel claim that you are "parroting".

The fact is he is wrong and he KNOWS that he is wrong.

He is a lying, hypocritical, little turd, shitfaced weasel.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129182 May 6, 2013
HTS, one of the reasons that we post links is so that you can go and see what the experts say yourself. That way you have to debunk their claims not ours.

One of the problems with the nonscientific sites that your lot link is that the science is so bad that it does not take an expert in the field to debunk it. It can be debunked by anyone with at least half of a brain.

Of course that leaves you and yours out of the loop.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129183 May 6, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
Beautiful illustration of chimp, human, and Aurtrlalopithecus hips in that first link Aura. Even How's That for Stupid should be able to see that Lucy's hips were much more like human hips than chimp hips.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#129184 May 6, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Beautiful illustration of chimp, human, and Aurtrlalopithecus hips in that first link Aura. Even How's That for Stupid should be able to see that Lucy's hips were much more like human hips than chimp hips.
And with the skull , the teeth give it away.

Australopithecus teeth are human like.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...

Chimps and Gorillas have those huge K-9s.

http://www.editinternational.com/images/galle...

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#129185 May 6, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Your parroted response proves nothing, because everything you say is subjective. Tell me what the angle of the pelvis is that defines a human pelvis and at what point it becomes an ape pelvis...
What do you means its brain case is more human than a chimp? How so? Do you have any clue as to the limits of morphologic variablity that exists in human skulls?

So you see , to believe god created man in the form he is now.
You will have to admit he created in steps , creatures that became over time .. less and less ape to more and more human like.
Which is what evolution says. But you could still be right if....
God created these creatures that looked ape and then created more that looked less ape. Then created more that looked kinda human. Then created more that looked more human. Then created more that looked almost human. Then created some that looked roughly human but didn't like them either. Then he created man. Seems to me they left some stuff out your bible though.

But why would god create things so that it looked just like they evolved over time to become what we are?

And that my friend , IS,, the 64 million dollar question.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#129186 May 6, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
HTS, one of the reasons that we post links is so that you can go and see what the experts say yourself. That way you have to debunk their claims not ours.
One of the problems with the nonscientific sites that your lot link is that the science is so bad that it does not take an expert in the field to debunk it. It can be debunked by anyone with at least half of a brain.
Of course that leaves you and yours out of the loop.
You blindly post links without logically defending any of your claims. All you know how to do is defer to cherry-picked "authorities" who sit around making wild unsubstantiated conjectures. None of the links you posted are convincing. They're all 100% BS. I'm asking for science, not evo-babbling. If can't personally defend any of those links, you have nothing.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#129187 May 6, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
So you see , to believe god created man in the form he is now.
You will have to admit he created in steps , creatures that became over time .. less and less ape to more and more human like.
Which is what evolution says. But you could still be right if....
God created these creatures that looked ape and then created more that looked less ape. Then created more that looked kinda human. Then created more that looked more human. Then created more that looked almost human. Then created some that looked roughly human but didn't like them either. Then he created man. Seems to me they left some stuff out your bible though.
But why would god create things so that it looked just like they evolved over time to become what we are?
And that my friend , IS,, the 64 million dollar question.
I often ponder that the christian god is actually the god Set, not the sun god that most scholars claim it is. But I have little evidence to back that thought up so it's pretty much just a passing one, based only on what the christians claim.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#129188 May 6, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You blindly post links without logically defending any of your claims. All you know how to do is defer to cherry-picked "authorities" who sit around making wild unsubstantiated conjectures. None of the links you posted are convincing. They're all 100% BS. I'm asking for science, not evo-babbling. If can't personally defend any of those links, you have nothing.
Now this is still just pure projection, nothing but projection, the most projection in this number of words I have ever seen anywhere. Congrats on breaking an internet record.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129189 May 6, 2013
HTS, have you looked at the latest find, that of Asutralopithecus sediba?

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fos...

No more complaints about missing parts, it was only a tooth, or only part of a skull. This is a rare find where the entire hands and feet are preserved. Usually the small bones are lost. Not in this case:

"The fossil skeletons of Au. sediba from Malapa cave are so complete that scientists can see what entire skeletons looked like near the time when Homo evolved. Details of the teeth, the length of the arms and legs, and the narrow upper chest resemble earlier Australopithecus, while other tooth traits and the broad lower chest resemble humans. These links indicate that Au. sediba may reveal information about the origins and ancestor of the genus Homo. Functional changes in the pelvis of Au. sediba point to the evolution of upright walking, while other parts of the skeleton retain features found in other australopithecines. Measurements of the strength of the humerus and femur show that Au. sediba had a more human-like pattern of locomotion than a fossil attributed to Homo habilis. These features suggest that Au. sediba walked upright on a regular basis and that changes in the pelvis occurred before other changes in the body that are found in later specimens of Homo. The Australopithecus sediba skull has several derived features, such as relatively small premolars and molars, and facial features that are more similar to those in Homo. However, despite these changes in the pelvis and skull, other parts of Au. sediba skeleton shows a body similar to that of other australopithecines with long upper limbs and a small cranial capacity. The fossils also show that changes in the pelvis and the dentition occurred before changes in limb proportions or cranial capacity. "

So what are you guys going to complain about with this find?

With Lucy you complained that she was given more human like feet than chimpanzee feet. As you have seen the skull is more like a human skull than a chimpanzee skull, at least when you consider the all important teeth. The hips are much more like a modern man's than a chimpanzee's hips. So what sort of foot would you put on it, something closer to a human foot or a chimp foot? Since it was closer to a human in these other aspects than it was to a chimp I would put more of a human foot on it than a chimp foot.

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 30 min Eagle 12 - 32,607
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Eagle 12 - 80,071
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr 15th Dalai Lama 163,801
News Intelligent design (Jul '15) Sat Dogen 571
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Sep 23 ChromiuMan 222,780
What's your religion? Sep 22 Zog Has-fallen 4
Life started in Tennessee proof. Sep 15 Science4life 1
More from around the web