Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 179628 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.

HTS

Englewood, CO

#131256 May 24, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem with that post begins and ends here. You're asserting design. Until you can demonstrate that something was designed, you cannot rightly assert it was designed.
What would a not-designed universe look like? How do you think it would differ from our universe, and how do you reach that conclusion? Please, share the evidence that supports your suppositions. Thanks in advance for a shit-ton of absolute dick-all.
1. Life and its complexity can be evaluated, and it can be concluded to have been designed, regardless of man's inability to "demonstrate that it was designed".

2. A non-designed universe would be nothing but chaos, and it would be certainly lifeless. I'm simply making a logical scientific deduction. Randomness does not produce order... ever.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#131257 May 24, 2013
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem with that post begins and ends here. You're asserting design. Until you can demonstrate that something was designed, you cannot rightly assert it was designed.
What would a not-designed universe look like? How do you think it would differ from our universe, and how do you reach that conclusion? Please, share the evidence that supports your suppositions. Thanks in advance for a shit-ton of absolute dick-all.
Unless it's in duck-step with your dogma, you're can't even discuss it. You're one-dimensional.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#131258 May 24, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You have a very comical view of breeding. Very. So then you actually think that if someone with black hair breeds with someone who has blonde hair, the offspring would all have brown hair. Well then, every offspring would look identical as well. You still end up with everyone looking identical in your fantasy version.
Again you show you lack of knowledge. Any off spring could get their traits such as hair or eye color or more from the parents of their parents of their parents ect ect. As I stated of course the kids will be different being they are made from two different parents with two DNA, two generation histories ect ect. That's a common sense question. By this lame comment of yours about the hair it is like you are saying that people mix like paint. Very Lame of You. LMFAO

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#131259 May 24, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Life and its complexity can be evaluated, and it can be concluded to have been designed, regardless of man's inability to "demonstrate that it was designed".
2. A non-designed universe would be nothing but chaos, and it would be certainly lifeless. I'm simply making a logical scientific deduction. Randomness does not produce order... ever.
How can you draw conclusions on something you can't even demonstrate experimentally? Sure you can physically say whatever you want, but it will be meaningless.
You certainly can't draw that conclusion based even on what little you appear to know. The randomness in the universe is not all consuming. There are physical laws govern how the universe works. As usual, you are arguing against a position no one is really taking and then claiming the position you are actually against is wrong as a result. This twisted logic you use is truly astounding.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#131260 May 24, 2013
I see the moron squad is here in full force. And they brought their football.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#131261 May 24, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
I see the moron squad is here in full force. And they brought their football.
Evolution Theory has three aspects: hereditary changes, appearance of new species, and a theory explaining both of these. Currently there are several theories of evolution so a precise definition of evolution is IMPOSSIBLE. Most definitions of evolution make no claims as to the existence or non-existence of a God, though evolution is often associated with atheism.
How many different theories are out there? Many because they keep changing them because they really have NO IDEA what really happened. As I said once before what you all believe now will change in 20-40 or more years as the theories that are around now get out dated, proven wrong by new theories of the future generations.
Now you all go on and on about facts and proof. A fact is something that is true without a doubt and doesn't change. If those scientific facts were true they would not be forever changing them. What they call facts now will change in the future. So they are just theories of "guessing" or "we think" until something else or new proves us wrong. Their "guessing" and "we think" are like a diaper. Put in place to satisfy the need of the study and to satisfy the people that believe in it but it gets changed when it starts to stink from all the crap it holds. Fact is on both accounts Evolution and God; no one really knows what happened. That is for sure a fact!

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#131262 May 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution Theory has three aspects: hereditary changes, appearance of new species, and a theory explaining both of these. Currently there are several theories of evolution so a precise definition of evolution is IMPOSSIBLE. Most definitions of evolution make no claims as to the existence or non-existence of a God, though evolution is often associated with atheism.
How many different theories are out there? Many because they keep changing them because they really have NO IDEA what really happened. As I said once before what you all believe now will change in 20-40 or more years as the theories that are around now get out dated, proven wrong by new theories of the future generations.
Now you all go on and on about facts and proof. A fact is something that is true without a doubt and doesn't change. If those scientific facts were true they would not be forever changing them. What they call facts now will change in the future. So they are just theories of "guessing" or "we think" until something else or new proves us wrong. Their "guessing" and "we think" are like a diaper. Put in place to satisfy the need of the study and to satisfy the people that believe in it but it gets changed when it starts to stink from all the crap it holds. Fact is on both accounts Evolution and God; no one really knows what happened. That is for sure a fact!
What would these three theories be O Great One?

I think it is a fact that you are nuts. You don't have to work so hard to convince me either.

There is only one accepted theory of evolution. It is the same theory that has been in existence since it was formally published by Charles Darwin. It is the one that is used in science. There are no others. The theory has not changed. Any change you claim is a reflection of your limited understanding of the theory and of science. It is clear you are out of your depth in these discussions.

The data that has developed over the last 200 years support this one theory to the exclusion of other theories. The theory of evolution does not address the existence of God in any way. All it does is call into question a literal interpretation of the Bible and it is not the only line of human pursuit that does that.

If you feel the way you do, there really is no point for you to be here. Of course I am not including your latent homoerotic interest in stalking me. I will say again, while I support your right to live your life as you choose, I am not inclined along those lines. As creepy flattering as your advances may be.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#131263 May 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Evolution Theory has three aspects: hereditary changes, appearance of new species, and a theory explaining both of these. Currently there are several theories of evolution so a precise definition of evolution is IMPOSSIBLE. Most definitions of evolution make no claims as to the existence or non-existence of a God, though evolution is often associated with atheism.
How many different theories are out there? Many because they keep changing them because they really have NO IDEA what really happened. As I said once before what you all believe now will change in 20-40 or more years as the theories that are around now get out dated, proven wrong by new theories of the future generations.
Now you all go on and on about facts and proof. A fact is something that is true without a doubt and doesn't change. If those scientific facts were true they would not be forever changing them. What they call facts now will change in the future. So they are just theories of "guessing" or "we think" until something else or new proves us wrong. Their "guessing" and "we think" are like a diaper. Put in place to satisfy the need of the study and to satisfy the people that believe in it but it gets changed when it starts to stink from all the crap it holds. Fact is on both accounts Evolution and God; no one really knows what happened. That is for sure a fact!
This rant only shows that you truly don't know what the theory of evolution says. Yes, there have been some changes over the years. The heart of the theory has not changed, nor has the driving forces. Early on the methodology of change was not known. Darwin did not know how traits were passed on. Gene theory was unknown at the time of publication. Mendel published his work about 6 years after Darwin first published Origins of Species.

What you are complaining about is a constant improvement of the understanding of evolution. Science is always improving. Galileo understood more than his predecessors, Newton understood even more, the same goes for Einstein, Feynman, and today Hawking. The fact that they all had different views of the universe did not make them necessarily "wrong". Rather the later ones are more correct than the earlier ones.

If you cannot understand how science keeps improving in all branches over time then perhaps you should leave it to the adults.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#131264 May 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
This rant only shows that you truly don't know what the theory of evolution says. Yes, there have been some changes over the years. The heart of the theory has not changed, nor has the driving forces. Early on the methodology of change was not known. Darwin did not know how traits were passed on. Gene theory was unknown at the time of publication. Mendel published his work about 6 years after Darwin first published Origins of Species.
What you are complaining about is a constant improvement of the understanding of evolution. Science is always improving. Galileo understood more than his predecessors, Newton understood even more, the same goes for Einstein, Feynman, and today Hawking. The fact that they all had different views of the universe did not make them necessarily "wrong". Rather the later ones are more correct than the earlier ones.
If you cannot understand how science keeps improving in all branches over time then perhaps you should leave it to the adults.
Show me one proven Fact that hasn't CHANGED that there is only ONE theory of evolution. The way you talk that should be an easy task for you to do. If you can't, then you show you have nothing but guesses and blah blah.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#131265 May 24, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>What would these three theories be O Great One?
I think it is a fact that you are nuts. You don't have to work so hard to convince me either.
There is only one accepted theory of evolution. It is the same theory that has been in existence since it was formally published by Charles Darwin. It is the one that is used in science. There are no others. The theory has not changed. Any change you claim is a reflection of your limited understanding of the theory and of science. It is clear you are out of your depth in these discussions.
The data that has developed over the last 200 years support this one theory to the exclusion of other theories. The theory of evolution does not address the existence of God in any way. All it does is call into question a literal interpretation of the Bible and it is not the only line of human pursuit that does that.
If you feel the way you do, there really is no point for you to be here. Of course I am not including your latent homoerotic interest in stalking me. I will say again, while I support your right to live your life as you choose, I am not inclined along those lines. As creepy flattering as your advances may be.
Show me one proven Fact that hasn't CHANGED that there is only ONE theory of evolution. The way you talk that should be an easy task for you to do. If you can't, then you show you have nothing but guesses and blah blah.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#131266 May 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Currently there are several theories of evolution so a precise definition of evolution is IMPOSSIBLE.
Go ahead and list them, please.

Or did you just read that on a "Christian" website and it tickled your itchy ears?
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Fact is on both accounts Evolution and God; no one really knows what happened. That is for sure a fact!
No, that is NOT a "fact" but a religious opinion held by a certain segment of ignorant, under-educated mostly American Protestant fundamentalist Christians.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#131267 May 24, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
You never have any science behind your wild speculation. All you do is blindly follow what you want to believe.
This is rich from you, ignorant Jesus Freak.

We constantly link you to science websites and peer-reviewed papers, and yet YOU "blindly follow what you want to believe" because your tawdry BuyBull beliefs are threatened by REALITY.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#131268 May 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
This rant only shows that you truly don't know what the theory of evolution says. Yes, there have been some changes over the years. The heart of the theory has not changed, nor has the driving forces. Early on the methodology of change was not known. Darwin did not know how traits were passed on. Gene theory was unknown at the time of publication. Mendel published his work about 6 years after Darwin first published Origins of Species.
What you are complaining about is a constant improvement of the understanding of evolution. Science is always improving. Galileo understood more than his predecessors, Newton understood even more, the same goes for Einstein, Feynman, and today Hawking. The fact that they all had different views of the universe did not make them necessarily "wrong". Rather the later ones are more correct than the earlier ones.
If you cannot understand how science keeps improving in all branches over time then perhaps you should leave it to the adults.
The whole point I am saying about your evolution is there are never any facts that don't change. You back that up in this rant of yours. So again they are "guesses" and "we believe" at best.
Hell we change everyday for we age, the world changes everyday. Change does not always mean better or improvement.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#131269 May 24, 2013
Gillette wrote:
<quoted text>
Go ahead and list them, please.
Or did you just read that on a "Christian" website and it tickled your itchy ears?
<quoted text>
No, that is NOT a "fact" but a religious opinion held by a certain segment of ignorant, under-educated mostly American Protestant fundamentalist Christians.
Show me facts that anyone knows exactly what has happened since your the day earth formed. Whether by evolution or by God. Show some facts. Not guess, we think or speculation. FACT is no one knows for sure!!!!!!!!!!
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#131270 May 24, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
The earliest known rocks show clear oxidation rendering the so called reducing atmosphere moot thus ending any chance of early life forming in the first place...
Got any link to peer-reviewed science on this supposed "fact"?

And do you even UNDERSTAND what you copied and pasted here? LOL

And why is all of science seemingly unaware that "early life could never have formed in the first place," while a handful of teenage Jesus Freaks communicating (sort of) over the Internet have the actual TRUTH here? LOL
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Your stupidly of Christian faith stereotypes all Christians into one group and if the students at Baylor believe in evolution (and having a bunch of under age wife's) then great...
It's the FACULTY -- the TRAINED SCIENCE FACULTY --- at the world's largest Baptist university who state unequivocally that evolution is true and correct and they teach it and do not teach crackpot "alternative theories," i.e. your silly Jesus Freak "Creationism," for example.
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
The fossil record has no intermediates other than sketch artist going off of mere bone fragments.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitio...
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.h...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fos...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transiti...
http://www.geo.ucalgary.ca/~macrae/talk_origi...

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#131272 May 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
The whole point I am saying about your evolution is there are never any facts that don't change. You back that up in this rant of yours. So again they are "guesses" and "we believe" at best.
Hell we change everyday for we age, the world changes everyday. Change does not always mean better or improvement.
Fact don't change. Explanations sometimes do.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#131273 May 24, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
The question is how does life function without design?
Apparently quite well.

And a scientist would say "No, the question is, Why do you assume or conclude there is "design" and what is your pee-reviewed EVIDENCE for it."
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Your random accident theory is not plausible....
No one here propounds a "random accident theory." The laws of nature do not work randomly.

Evolution is not random, although some part of it, i.e. some gene mutations, appear to be random. Natural selection is certainly not random.
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
It seems to be ok for the evolutionist to ignore science on this matter by just stating "well it's all just here so it must just spontaneously happen"....
Errr, no. We have museums and textbooks and DNA labs FULL of hard evidence that points directly at evolution. We've had it for 150 years. There is NO controversy in science as to whether evolution occurs.

To call all of that "pixie dust" is just to be willfully stupid.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#131274 May 24, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
This rant only shows that you truly don't know what the theory of evolution says. Yes, there have been some changes over the years. The heart of the theory has not changed, nor has the driving forces. Early on the methodology of change was not known. Darwin did not know how traits were passed on. Gene theory was unknown at the time of publication. Mendel published his work about 6 years after Darwin first published Origins of Species.
What you are complaining about is a constant improvement of the understanding of evolution. Science is always improving. Galileo understood more than his predecessors, Newton understood even more, the same goes for Einstein, Feynman, and today Hawking. The fact that they all had different views of the universe did not make them necessarily "wrong". Rather the later ones are more correct than the earlier ones.
If you cannot understand how science keeps improving in all branches over time then perhaps you should leave it to the adults.
You know it is amazing how much Darwin got right straight from the get go, considering he didn't know about genetics or have a strong fossil record to work with.
Gillette

Fairfield, IA

#131275 May 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me facts that anyone knows exactly what has happened since your the day earth formed. Whether by evolution or by God. Show some facts. Not guess, we think or speculation. FACT is no one knows for sure!!!!!!!!!!
You f-ing Jesus Freak moron. Get an education and learn how science works.

Then get back to us with any questions, if you have any left.

“No such thing as ABIODARWINISM”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

No ABIODARWINISTS either!

#131276 May 24, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Show me one proven Fact that hasn't CHANGED that there is only ONE theory of evolution. The way you talk that should be an easy task for you to do. If you can't, then you show you have nothing but guesses and blah blah.
This is your claim. You do the walking.

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 Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 1 min scientia potentia... 195,121
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 min ChristineM 11,163
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr thetruth 29,448
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 2 hr MIDutch 150,522
Science News (Sep '13) 9 hr Ricky F 3,573
kitchen Fitters In Manchester Area Wed lihatsaja1 1
Ribose can be produced in space Tue MIDutch 2
More from around the web