Should evolution be taught in high school?

Feb 24, 2008 | Posted by: Cash | Full story: www.scientificblogging.com

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."
Comments
126,821 - 126,840 of 172,515 Comments Last updated 3 hrs ago
Mugwump

London, UK

#130064 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Pardon me...
I almost forgot... laws of mathematical probability do not apply to Darwinism.
As I recall you have already posted your probability argument , and I pointed out the first 2 assumptions were wrong - then got bored so someone else (ChristineM ?) destroyed the rest point by point.

But if you want to go over it again, feel free and post some figures/maths to support your argument.
HTS

Sidney, MT

#130065 May 14, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
As I recall you have already posted your probability argument , and I pointed out the first 2 assumptions were wrong - then got bored so someone else (ChristineM ?) destroyed the rest point by point.
But if you want to go over it again, feel free and post some figures/maths to support your argument.
In most mammals, the probability of a mutation resulting in a substitution of a specific nucleotide substitution is one in two billion births. Explain mathematically how at least thirty million nucleotide substitutions occurred over a period of eight million years to result in ape/human evolution.

I already know what your idiotic answer will be. You imagine that any random mutation can result in the intelligence of man. That dogma contradicts all that is known regarding properties of mutations.
Mugwump

London, UK

#130066 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
In most mammals, the probability of a mutation resulting in a substitution of a specific nucleotide substitution is one in two billion births. Explain mathematically how at least thirty million nucleotide substitutions occurred over a period of eight million years to result in ape/human evolution.
I already know what your idiotic answer will be. You imagine that any random mutation can result in the intelligence of man. That dogma contradicts all that is known regarding properties of mutations.
Sigh ,

Ok

First - can you provide a reference to the above numbers (a URL so we know you ain't copying and pasting from creationist sites)- keep asking for these damm links but you never do - wonder why?

Second (but concentrate on the first)- what have the odds of a SPECIFIC mutation (presuming you mean point mutation - you DO know there are others of course) got to do with your probability argument - you thinking directional again ain't ya.

Anyway , notwithstanding am going out for the night - but if you can for once provide a link to support your assertions (may as well start - how is that evidence for how 'the majority of doctors reject Evo' coming along anyway)

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#130067 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Mike, if you want to engage in a scientific debate, perhaps you could start by outlining specifically how many proposal of evolutionary transmutation is mathematically possible. So far all you have done is told bedtime stories. They're entertaining and amusing, but do not qualify as science.
Of course it is mathematically possible. Why wouldn't it be?

Every single stupid argument against evolution using math has been shown to have a fatal flaw. At that point no more math is necessary.
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#130068 May 14, 2013
Actually - may as well just go over the 'probability argument' from Feb

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TCT...

Who knew google was so flexible if you are adept at using keywords

Now, if only we can find the right keywords we can stop UC re-posting his 99 debunked reasons why he has a memory span of a goldfish

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#130069 May 14, 2013
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
First - can you provide a reference to the above numbers
I was wondering about that as well.
Mugwump

Manchester, UK

#130070 May 14, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
I was wondering about that as well.
Last post for an evening as work is taking us out for a celebratory dinner for a successful system release (or 'well done guys - you didn't f$&k it up this time')

But i suspect his source is the same as he uses for :-

Most medics reject evolution
HIV/AIDS has never been contracted via needlestick
Big Bang was the same as an explosion
Big Bang has something to do with evolution
And (my personal favorite).....

Hitler ordered the destruction of Origins so he could claim the idea as his own (seriously - COMEDY GOLD)

And the reference he uses ?

www.pullingcrapoutofhisarse.com

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#130071 May 14, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is the definition of evolve. Look it up I copied and pasted it so you could bash me lol. "1.develop gradually: to develop something gradually, often into something MORE COMPLEX OR ADVANCED" You are the ones that go on about science so do tell your definition of evolve?
"Better", "Complex", "Advanced" are all human concepts and have nothing at all to do with evolution. Evolution does not always move in these directions.

For example, Christians evolved from Humans.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#130072 May 14, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
The happy medium is teach and offer both religion and evolution. That way they can take and study which one they believe and no one feels left out, let down or discriminated against.
This only works if you give every religion equal time with science. This would take forever. Best to just stick with science in the science class. If a person wants to study religion, they can do so in the comparative religions and mythology class.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Level 5

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#130073 May 14, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
........
As far as my IQ, they tested me back in 8th grade, it was only 139 but I know you must have a greater one than that.
.........
I have a hypothesis .... only people with a double digit IQ are stupid enough to brag about their "triple digit" IQ. If anyone cares to test this hypothesis, I would like for you to be the first volunteer subject.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#130074 May 14, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it is mathematically possible. Why wouldn't it be?
Every single stupid argument against evolution using math has been shown to have a fatal flaw. At that point no more math is necessary.
According to you, evolution doesn't need to conform to laws of probability as do all other legitimate sciences. This is because evolution is a religion.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#130075 May 14, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it is mathematically possible. Why wouldn't it be?
.
A monkey cannot type a Shakespearean play, regardless of how much you imagine that he can

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#130076 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
According to you, evolution doesn't need to conform to laws of probability as do all other legitimate sciences. This is because evolution is a religion.
Wrong idiot. I never said anything even close to what you just claimed.

You have never brought up one valid objection to evolution from a mathematical point of view.

I know you don't understand math, otherwise you would not spew such nonsense. All of your attacks have a fatal error. For example I could disprove Einstein theories of relativity, if 2 + 2 = 5. But we know that 2 + 2 = 4 so my claim has a fatal flaw in it. There is no point in going any further. I have pointed out the fatal flaws in your mathematical attacks so there was no point in going past those errors of yours.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#130077 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
A monkey cannot type a Shakespearean play, regardless of how much you imagine that he can
Evolution doesn't equate to a monkey randomly typing until the Complete Works emerge.

This has been pointed out to you many times, Liar for Cheeses.

Again, a better "monkeys typing" analogy to biological evolution would go something like this:

Every time one of those million monkeys were to randomly type a sequence of letters like "Ham" or "let" or "to be or," that sequence would be KEPT and added to the collection.

This part of the analogy mimics the working of natural selection in biological evolution, which keeps random mutations that are beneficial to the life of that organism.

With this kind of "filter" in place, it probably wouldn't take the monkeys that long at all to type the complete works of Shakespeare. 10 years? 100 years? 1,000? Not long at all in the context of the 4.5 BILLION years the world has been around.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#130078 May 14, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
A monkey cannot type a Shakespearean play, regardless of how much you imagine that he can
Yet using an attack on this problem using a form of natural selection virtual monkeys have not just typed a Shakespearean play, they have typed almost his complete works.

When you use math incorrectly you lose.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#130079 May 14, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a hypothesis .... only people with a double digit IQ are stupid enough to brag about their "triple digit" IQ. If anyone cares to test this hypothesis, I would like for you to be the first volunteer subject.
I think that HST made an almost identical claim yesterday.

Theoretically half of the population has a two digit IQ and half have a three digit IQ, at least that is the way it is supposed to be by definition. So saying that someone has a two digit IQ is not all that devastating of an insult. It is a a claim that someone has less than average intelligence. Nothing more, nothing less.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#130080 May 14, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution doesn't equate to a monkey randomly typing until the Complete Works emerge.
This has been pointed out to you many times, Liar for Cheeses.
Again, a better "monkeys typing" analogy to biological evolution would go something like this:
Every time one of those million monkeys were to randomly type a sequence of letters like "Ham" or "let" or "to be or," that sequence would be KEPT and added to the collection.
This part of the analogy mimics the working of natural selection in biological evolution, which keeps random mutations that are beneficial to the life of that organism.
With this kind of "filter" in place, it probably wouldn't take the monkeys that long at all to type the complete works of Shakespeare. 10 years? 100 years? 1,000? Not long at all in the context of the 4.5 BILLION years the world has been around.
Your analogy demonstrates the necessity of intelligent design.
Any hypothetical device that could remove incorrect keystrokes would have to have knowledge of the English language.
The magical filtering effect that you imagine natural selection to possess exists only in your mind.
Traits cannot be improved one nucleotide at a time, just as a Shakespearean play cannot be improved one keystroke at a time.
Traits are defined by many nucleotides, sometimes thousands.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#130081 May 14, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong idiot. I never said anything even close to what you just claimed.
You have never brought up one valid objection to evolution from a mathematical point of view.
I know you don't understand math, otherwise you would not spew such nonsense. All of your attacks have a fatal error. For example I could disprove Einstein theories of relativity, if 2 + 2 = 5. But we know that 2 + 2 = 4 so my claim has a fatal flaw in it. There is no point in going any further. I have pointed out the fatal flaws in your mathematical attacks so there was no point in going past those errors of yours.
With all of the BS that you spew, you fail to demonstrates that any proposed mechanism of evolution in mathematically possible.
Do you have the intellectual honesty to actually confront this challenge?
HTS

Englewood, CO

#130082 May 14, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet using an attack on this problem using a form of natural selection virtual monkeys have not just typed a Shakespearean play, they have typed almost his complete works.
When you use math incorrectly you lose.
In order for your analogy to be correct, natural selection would need to have supernal power.
If this is the case, why does anyone have wisdom teeth or an appendix?
Why didn't natural selection remove these traits millions of years ago?
HTS

Englewood, CO

#130083 May 14, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution doesn't equate to a monkey randomly typing until the Complete Works emerge.
This has been pointed out to you many times, Liar for Cheeses.
Again, a better "monkeys typing" analogy to biological evolution would go something like this:
Every time one of those million monkeys were to randomly type a sequence of letters like "Ham" or "let" or "to be or," that sequence would be KEPT and added to the collection.
This part of the analogy mimics the working of natural selection in biological evolution, which keeps random mutations that are beneficial to the life of that organism.
With this kind of "filter" in place, it probably wouldn't take the monkeys that long at all to type the complete works of Shakespeare. 10 years? 100 years? 1,000? Not long at all in the context of the 4.5 BILLION years the world has been around.
What observational evidence do you have that natural selection can filter out mistakes in this manner?
I realize that this fairytale has been propagated for over 150 years, but where is the proof?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr DanFromSmithville 136,256
Evolution Theory Facing Crisis 3 hr Christian 202
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 hr Lawrence Wolf 115,227
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) 7 hr TurkanaBoy 315
Science News (Sep '13) Thu positronium 2,848
The Satanic Character of Social Darwinism Aug 27 Zog Has-fallen 343
Natural Selection Not The Only Process That Dri... (Jan '14) Aug 25 reMAAT 20
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Evolution Debate People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••