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
127,481 - 127,500 of 171,386 Comments Last updated 52 min ago

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130733
May 19, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Bigfoot invented DNA. Is that a controversy in the scientific community? What if I get a million people to agree with me? Now is it a scientific controversy?
As soon as people have evidence and peer-reviewed research to back up their creationist arguments, they're just as real a scientific controversy as bigfoot inventing DNA.
No way! How did you find out the secret? Government officials will be over shortly to erase your hard drive and incarcerate you until you stop telling everyone our secrets.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130734
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you think I've been doing with several papers? Harmful mutations are accumulating in the human genome. THere is no controversy about that. If you doubt me, why shouldn't you have children with your sister or mother? What do think is the reason for that?
There is no such thing as genetic entropy. Therefore, it cannot be the cause of any natural phenomena.

The problems that arise from incest are not genetic entropy.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130735
May 20, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as genetic entropy. Therefore, it cannot be the cause of any natural phenomena.
The problems that arise from incest are not genetic entropy.
"accumulation of VSDMs in a lineage...acts like a time bomb...the existence of vertebrate lineages...should be limited to 10^6-10^7 generations."

A.S. Kondrashov. 1995. Contamination of the genome by very slightly deletereous mutations: WHY HAVE WE NOT DIED 100 TIMES OVER? J. Theor. Biol.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130736
May 20, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as genetic entropy. Therefore, it cannot be the cause of any natural phenomena.
The problems that arise from incest are not genetic entropy.
"...the total number of new mutations per diploid human genome per generation is about 100...at least 10% of these are deletereous...analysis of human variability suggtsthat a normal person carries thousands of deletereous alleles..."

S. Kondrashov. 2002. Direct estimates of human per nucleotide mutation rates at 20 loci causing Mendelian diseases. Human Mutations.

Then what are the problems with incest and recessive genes if it's not the accumulation of VSDMs? This is exactly what the problem is.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130737
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
"...the total number of new mutations per diploid human genome per generation is about 100...at least 10% of these are deletereous...analysis of human variability suggtsthat a normal person carries thousands of deletereous alleles..."
S. Kondrashov. 2002. Direct estimates of human per nucleotide mutation rates at 20 loci causing Mendelian diseases. Human Mutations.
Then what are the problems with incest and recessive genes if it's not the accumulation of VSDMs? This is exactly what the problem is.
You keep quoting someone you clearly do not realize .... actually helps with advancing the theory of evolution. Ironically, his works help demonstrate the reason our population must be placed in check, because we are helping those with negative traits succeed while those without refuse to breed.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130738
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
"accumulation of VSDMs in a lineage...acts like a time bomb...the existence of vertebrate lineages...should be limited to 10^6-10^7 generations."
A.S. Kondrashov. 1995. Contamination of the genome by very slightly deletereous mutations: WHY HAVE WE NOT DIED 100 TIMES OVER? J. Theor. Biol.
You didn't find that quote in the source article. You c/p'ed it from other creationists. If you don't understand the context, how can you understand what is being said? You do know what quotemining is, right?

And, this is exactly why I mocked the premise of "fitness" regarding humans. We've redefined fitness for survival to meet our own standards, not those of nature. As a result, the genome is filling with deleterious mutations. We are CHOOSING to do that. That's not genetic entropy.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130739
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The statement is true. To refute that, show me a genetists who believes otherwise.
No dipshit, it was *YOUR* claim. I don't need to refute what you simply lie about.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
You asked me specifically for the Crow article which for some reason you had difficultly finding.
Shove it. I simply asked you specifically what you were referring to. Sorry that was too much to ask of your lazy ass.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
That was to support that the decline in fitness is believed to be occurring at 1-2% per generation. And it does. Don't blame me for your poor research and comprehension skills.
So you can't back up your claim. Instead you want to piss and moan that I can't back it up for you. Once again, you've proven yourself to be full of shit.

At least you're consistent.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130740
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Genetic entropy. It's because all those mutations you call changes are either neutral or deletereous. The neutral ones can be ignored. The deletereous ones are harmful and cause detereoration, disease, and death. These harmful mutations are accumulating and that is exactly why you shouldn't have offspring with your sibling or parent. Everyday and every generation it gets worse. These are losses of genetic information and will never develop into anything except extinction.
Yet humans are healthier and live long than ever. Quite a mystery, eh Urb?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130741
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not what the research shows. I cited Crow, 1997 that showed fitness of the human genome is declining at the rate of 1-2% per generation (Crow, 1997). And that the censensus among human genetisists is that, at present, the human race is genetically degenerating due to rapid mutation accumulation and relaxed natural selection pressure (Crow, 1997).
Ah, no, Urb. You have yet to back up this so-called consensus among geneticists. You keep carrying on as if you had. You're not fooling anyone. Except possibly yourself.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130742
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't help it if you have reading comprehension issues.
Oh here we go! It time for Urb to whine "you don't understand!" again.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130743
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not just the Bible, it's the numerous scientific evidence that points to a young earth and a complete absense of evidence for evolution. I'm being very logical here.
Thanks for the laugh, Urb.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130744
May 20, 2013
 
Urb, you can't bullshit people anymore.

Without a proper link we know that you are lying. In this case it is very apparent that you got your so called "fact" from a discredited creatard site.

Go back and try again.

The answer to the question "Why aren't we dead a hundred times over?" is easy. There is no genetic entropy. Truly bad mutations don't even get born. Slightly bad mutations get born but do not reproduce. By the time you get to the point where a person can reproduce with a "bad mutation" it is already in the fuzzy area of being an environment sensitively qualified trait. In some environments it could be considered a "bad gene" in others a "good gene". Even in genetics absolutes are not real.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130745
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
My law of non-macroevolution:
YOUR law??? LOL You're on a roll, Urb.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130746
May 20, 2013
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
YOUR law??? LOL You're on a roll, Urb.
Try and refute it. You can't.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130747
May 20, 2013
 
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't find that quote in the source article. You c/p'ed it from other creationists. If you don't understand the context, how can you understand what is being said? You do know what quotemining is, right?
And, this is exactly why I mocked the premise of "fitness" regarding humans. We've redefined fitness for survival to meet our own standards, not those of nature. As a result, the genome is filling with deleterious mutations. We are CHOOSING to do that. That's not genetic entropy.
SO then according to you, having children with your sister should be no problem? Because accumulated VSDM's don't really exist, and those genetisists are all wrong?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130748
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Try and refute it. You can't.
Your made up law? Sure, I'll get right on that.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130749
May 20, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>SO then according to you, having children with your sister should be no problem? Because accumulated VSDM's don't really exist, and those genetisists are all wrong?
Congratulations.

Thats more evidence against The Flood.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130750
May 20, 2013
 
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Your made up law? Sure, I'll get right on that.
Perhaps I could call it Cowboy's Principle of Non-Macroevolution. Do you like better? Law may have been a bit much.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130751
May 20, 2013
 
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Congratulations.
Thats more evidence against The Flood.
Do you understand what the word "accumulate" means? That means that at first, there aren't any, or very few, but then with each generation, 100 or so VSDM's accumulate. The number increases with each generation. Now we have too many and must diversify in order to procreate in a healthy manner. Back in Noah's Day, this would not have been a problem becaues what miniscule number there were since creation would only have a very remote chance of being sexually combined and manifest disease and death as it does today.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#130752
May 20, 2013
 
"A 1994 study found a mean excess mortality with inbreeding among first cousins of 4.4%.[100] Children of parent-child or sibling-sibling unions are at increased risk compared to cousin-cousin unions. Studies suggest that 20-36% of these children will die or have major disability due to the inbreeding.[14] A study of 29 offspring resulting from brother-sister or father-daughter incest found that 20 had congenital abnormalities, including four directly attributable to autosomal recessive alleles.[101]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest

^ a b Wolf, Arthur P.; Durham, William H.(2004). Inbreeding, Incest, and the Incest Taboo: The State of Knowledge at the Turn of the Century. Stanford University Press. p. 3. ISBN 0-8047-5141-2.

^ Baird, P. A.; McGillivray, B.(1982). "Children of incest". The Journal of Pediatrics 101 (5): 8547. doi:10.1016/S0022-3476(82)8034 7-8. PMID 7131177.

There are numerous studies like this about inbreeding amoung animals in small populations. This is certainly one cause of extinction. This is also happening to us!

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••