Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180279 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

#129698 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Here are a couple interesting reads on the growth/shrinking-contracting/e xpanding of earth.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/ear...
http://www.enn.com/sci-tech/article/43112
You are confused and don't know what the articles were talking about.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129699 May 13, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It would appear that you are the confused one. What exactly are you trying to claim?
I believe in God and that God created Earth. If my belief is right when I die all will be great. If I am wrong then nothing will happen. Simple as that

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129700 May 13, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait, now you think gravity doesn't hold us to the Earth? Are you from 1AD?
Hmmm I don't see where I said that in my comment.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129701 May 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You are confused and don't know what the articles were talking about.
You say that because it contradicts what you are sayibg.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129702 May 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You are confused and don't know what the articles were talking about.
You say that because it contradicts what you are saying. But hey it is only years and years of science that what was that last line in the articles, oh yeah "Our study provides an independent confirmation that the solid Earth is not getting larger at present, within current measurement uncertainties," said Wu.
Who led that study, oh yeah it says "A NASA-led research team" but I am sure you know more and are much smarter than they are. LMFAO

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#129703 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is were we lost you. "the theory of gravity is the theory that any two particles of matter attract one another with a force directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them"
You are LOST and keep talking of falling or being held to earth by gravity. LMFAO
"We"?

Are you the Queen of England?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129704 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
You say that because it contradicts what you are saying. But hey it is only years and years of science that what was that last line in the articles, oh yeah "Our study provides an independent confirmation that the solid Earth is not getting larger at present, within current measurement uncertainties," said Wu.
Who led that study, oh yeah it says "A NASA-led research team" but I am sure you know more and are much smarter than they are. LMFAO
No, I say that because you are confused.

You did not understand my post, nor did you understand the posts that you linked.

By the way they did not contradict me. Creationists very often show their poor understanding of science when they try to link articles.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129705 May 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I say that because you are confused.
You did not understand my post, nor did you understand the posts that you linked.
By the way they did not contradict me. Creationists very often show their poor understanding of science when they try to link articles.
Here is your big chance shine. Explain your post along with the articles and clear the confusion up.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#129706 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmm I don't see where I said that in my comment.
Okay, let's add this all up then:

Gravity is the attraction of matter to other matter.

Gravity holds us to the planet, as well as draws nearby asteroids to crash to the surface, often those burn up in the atmosphere that is produced by the combined gravity and the organisms on the planet.

Thus, gravity exists, things continue to collide, and it's because of things colliding that planets were formed.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129707 May 13, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, let's add this all up then:
Gravity is the attraction of matter to other matter.
Gravity holds us to the planet, as well as draws nearby asteroids to crash to the surface, often those burn up in the atmosphere that is produced by the combined gravity and the organisms on the planet.
Thus, gravity exists, things continue to collide, and it's because of things colliding that planets were formed.
I understand all about gravity. You I am not sure. By the way which theory do you believe in and why? Isaac Newton defined gravity as a force that attracts all objects to all other objects. Albert Einstein said gravity is a result of the curvature of space-time

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129708 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is your big chance shine. Explain your post along with the articles and clear the confusion up.
I will for the slow minded.

Both my links and yours point out that the Earth is gaining mass from meteorites. The amount of growth is exceedingly small. Your NASA link properly pointed out that the amount of growth is smaller than the margin of error using the most accurate of methods of measurement. That means for all practical use that the Earth is not growing. That does not mean the Earth is not gaining mass from space.

At the same time we are losing mass to space from the loss of certain gases. Mostly hydrogen, but some helium and even a very little oxygen. I would like to see a few more articles on that before I hit on a solid number for that. Of course those are gaseous losses and not solid losses. So the land we are standing on would not be measurably affected by that at all.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#129709 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand all about gravity. You I am not sure. By the way which theory do you believe in and why? Isaac Newton defined gravity as a force that attracts all objects to all other objects. Albert Einstein said gravity is a result of the curvature of space-time
Red herring. The Earth was formed because large chunks of rock from a nearby star that died were drawn together to form two planetoids. They eventually collided and the modern Earth was born from the resulting combination of the two. The Moon was a large chunk ejected by that collision. There, I gave you the third grade level answer to your original question.

As to your red herring, the modern one is the one that is explained best and demonstrates the most reliable results, look up Higgs field.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129710 May 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I will for the slow minded.
Both my links and yours point out that the Earth is gaining mass from meteorites. The amount of growth is exceedingly small. Your NASA link properly pointed out that the amount of growth is smaller than the margin of error using the most accurate of methods of measurement. That means for all practical use that the Earth is not growing. That does not mean the Earth is not gaining mass from space.
At the same time we are losing mass to space from the loss of certain gases. Mostly hydrogen, but some helium and even a very little oxygen. I would like to see a few more articles on that before I hit on a solid number for that. Of course those are gaseous losses and not solid losses. So the land we are standing on would not be measurably affected by that at all.
which goes back to what I said "The land mass of the Earth is still growing do to volcano's spewing lava into water and but the overall size(sphere)of the earth is not getting bigger"

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#129711 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
which goes back to what I said "The land mass of the Earth is still growing do to volcano's spewing lava into water and but the overall size(sphere)of the earth is not getting bigger"
Wait, wait, wait .... um, you don't get what mass is, do you? The planet's mass cannot increase by regurgitating mass that is already in the planet. Doesn't work like that.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129712 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe in God and that God created Earth. If my belief is right when I die all will be great. If I am wrong then nothing will happen. Simple as that
Evolution has nothing to say about the existence of any gods. And what you have propose is a version of the long ago discredited Pascal's Wager.

Back to evolution. The theory only tells us what we already know, that Genesis is simply myth and nothing more. It seems that you may believe the Earth was created by magic. There is no evidence of that.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#129713 May 13, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
which goes back to what I said "The land mass of the Earth is still growing do to volcano's spewing lava into water and but the overall size(sphere)of the earth is not getting bigger"
That is wrong. On both counts. Reread the articles and try again. The amount of land area versus the amount of oceans is a complicated subject that is governed by several different factors. The overall size of the Earth is growing. All of the articles support that, including your first NASA article.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129714 May 13, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Red herring. The Earth was formed because large chunks of rock from a nearby star that died were drawn together to form two planetoids. They eventually collided and the modern Earth was born from the resulting combination of the two. The Moon was a large chunk ejected by that collision. There, I gave you the third grade level answer to your original question.
As to your red herring, the modern one is the one that is explained best and demonstrates the most reliable results, look up Higgs field.
About the moon, just off the top of my head scientists question that theory because the Earth probably wasn't rotating fast enough to spin off a whole moon. Look it up.

So you believe in Peter Higgs' theory. That is a more modern one that is out there. 1,000 years from now there will be better and more accurate theories than there are today.

Point being "Much of one’s knowledge/beliefs are “provisionally true”. True enough for practical purposes, but subject to revision if something new comes along. Many act as if they have absolute truth and facts in their hands, when what they actually have are "useful truths and facts". Things they know well enough to hold/have practical value".

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129715 May 13, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait, wait, wait .... um, you don't get what mass is, do you? The planet's mass cannot increase by regurgitating mass that is already in the planet. Doesn't work like that.
As I said "The land mass of the Earth is still growing" Key word is "LAND". I don't consider lava as land mass being it is a liquid until it hits the surface and hardens.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129716 May 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution has nothing to say about the existence of any gods. And what you have propose is a version of the long ago discredited Pascal's Wager.
Back to evolution. The theory only tells us what we already know, that Genesis is simply myth and nothing more. It seems that you may believe the Earth was created by magic. There is no evidence of that.
And that is where we see things differently. I believe in God and his creations and you don't. Simple as that

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#129717 May 13, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
That is wrong. On both counts. Reread the articles and try again. The amount of land area versus the amount of oceans is a complicated subject that is governed by several different factors. The overall size of the Earth is growing. All of the articles support that, including your first NASA article.
Where did it say that in the NASA article? Unless you mean the 0.004 inches that is considered statistically insignificant.

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) 1 min Joe Momma 57,905
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 32 min Subduction Zone 159,229
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 48 min Subduction Zone 1,782
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr Eagle 12 27,251
News Intelligent Design Education Day Sun replaytime 2
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Sun replaytime 219,597
News Betsy DeVos' Code Words for Creationism Offshoo... Feb 16 scientia potentia... 1
More from around the web