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.

HTS

Englewood, CO

#139342 Jun 27, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
You are correct. Genesis is an affront to all acquainted with science.
Many highly accomplished scientists believed in the book of Genesis.
Your arrogant, baseless declarations are indicative of extreme naïveté and shallowness.
If you showed a degree of respect, you would be taken more seriously.

I realize that it is politically fashionable to bash religion in the forum of scientific debate. However, you must understand that even if the Genesis account is proven false, such would do absolutely nothing to validate evolution. You cannot present as scientific evidence for a theory perceived flaws in religious doctrine.
I find it laughable that DarwinBots ultimately must resort to bashing religion as their theory comes under assault. Ultimately, the foundation of their so-called "evidence" [I use that term loosely] for evolution relies on the attempted disproof of intelligent design. This is because there is no positive evidence that evolution happened or that it is even possible.

“GOD ALMIGHTY”

Since: Aug 12

London, UK

#139343 Jun 27, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
It IS still moving, dipshit.
planetary motion is a proven scientific fact.

bull [email protected]

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#139344 Jun 27, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
What is wrong with you. Nowhere do any in science call the Crab Nebula, a ring nebula, as you claim by your post.
The caption below is from just under the second picture on that we page. See where it says," slams into surrounding nebula?
The Crab pulsar is the white dot in the center of the vortex revealed by NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory. The inner ring is probably created when the pulsar's wind slams into the surrounding nebula, and energy from this collision makes the whole structure glow. Somewhere inside here gamma-ray flares are created.
NASA / CXC / ASU / J.Hester et al.
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/Crab-Nebu...
The Crab and the ring nebulae are both planetary nebulas. They were formed by the exact same process. You are tilting at windmills.

“GOD ALMIGHTY”

Since: Aug 12

London, UK

#139345 Jun 27, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
You always twist word and meaning. Not once have you expressed what I have written, correctly. I understand by what you write, that you hate new or different thinking, but acting like a baby is well, childish.
I never claimed there was a black hole at the center of the Crab Nebula, I said the nebulas are leavings of black holes and nowhere in all I've written will anyone find different.. Grow up.
black holes are black suns. Period.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#139346 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Many highly accomplished scientists believed in the book of Genesis.
Your arrogant, baseless declarations are indicative of extreme naïveté and shallowness.
If you showed a degree of respect, you would be taken more seriously.
I realize that it is politically fashionable to bash religion in the forum of scientific debate. However, you must understand that even if the Genesis account is proven false, such would do absolutely nothing to validate evolution. You cannot present as scientific evidence for a theory perceived flaws in religious doctrine.
I find it laughable that DarwinBots ultimately must resort to bashing religion as their theory comes under assault. Ultimately, the foundation of their so-called "evidence" [I use that term loosely] for evolution relies on the attempted disproof of intelligent design. This is because there is no positive evidence that evolution happened or that it is even possible.
The key word in your fist sentence is "believed" - PAST TENSE.
As for the rest of your rant, all of which has repeatedly debunked, shredded, bent, folded, stapled, mutilated and properly round filed....
As usual and always, MIND YOUR 9TH COMMANDMENT.

“GOD ALMIGHTY”

Since: Aug 12

London, UK

#139347 Jun 27, 2013
biological systems that show up on the
environmental scene very late on
in this space quadrants history,
is liable to be an actual example of
poly-morposes and not regular adaptation.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#139348 Jun 27, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
So according to your stupidity, it exploded and all the material just stopped there. Lmao you're an idiot. When matter is blasted in a vacuum, it doesn't stop traveling in that vacuum.
Well, according to you morons, it does. Thanks for the laughs, keep em comin.
It's a PHOTOGRAPH, you moron. Of course it's not moving.
Elohim

Branford, CT

#139349 Jun 27, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, idiot! If light cannot carry images, please explain how a movie theater works.
Sorcery? Satan? The spin of the earth multiplied by a variable of the axis divided by the cosine of 36.221475?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#139350 Jun 27, 2013
the dark lord wrote:
<quoted text>
planetary motion is a proven scientific fact.
bull [email protected]
WTF are you talking about? We were discussing the debris of a supernova.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#139351 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Many highly accomplished scientists believed in the book of Genesis.
Hahahahah Name some.

And no, Newton was not one of them. He thought the Bible was corrupted. Einstein thought it was a compendium of childish myths.

Both believed in God. But not the literal words of the Bible.

Still, I am sure you can rattle off many others....we're waiting...

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#139352 Jun 27, 2013
Correction.

Newton believed in God.

Einstein made it clear he was agnostic.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#139353 Jun 27, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
The key word in your fist sentence is "believed" - PAST TENSE.
As for the rest of your rant, all of which has repeatedly debunked, shredded, bent, folded, stapled, mutilated and properly round filed....
As usual and always, MIND YOUR 9TH COMMANDMENT.
Your song and dance does nothing to validate evolution.
You know nothing about science.
You have a hypothesis...that life evolved.
You have no experimental evidence that it did happen or that it could happen.
Biological knowledge tells us that genetic information cannot be created through mutations, so you don't even have a viable mechanism to justify your intuitions.
You have faith that it happened...you have nothing more.
Your repeated blasphemous attacks against religious doctrines only validate my point...evolution is nothing less than a religion masquerading as science.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#139354 Jun 27, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Then prove what you say, show where I twisted his words or meanings.
In the post immediately before where you whined he was doing is -as follows:

"Lol, so what your stating is, that journals are any bodies biotch that will have them or better yet, pay them, as long as its new. Do you ever think before you write? I mean, ok, I see your point."

No, that is not what Dogen was stating or intending.

So you twisted his meaning, deliberately. Seems you do not even know when you are doing it!

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#139355 Jun 27, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Show where they are the same as humans, as in other apes.
No, I said that this would probably be the basis that they made their claims on - comparison to other apes and primates. Should I chase a red herring just to satisfy you? I think not.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#139356 Jun 27, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hahahahah Name some.
And no, Newton was not one of them. He thought the Bible was corrupted. Einstein thought it was a compendium of childish myths.
Both believed in God. But not the literal words of the Bible.
Still, I am sure you can rattle off many others....we're waiting...
It's irrelevant what version of intelligent design they believed in.
They believed in a higher power.
The notion that science does not lead one to believe in a higher power is false.
You cannot invoke any laws of science that validate your belief in atheistic evolution.
You are required to place faith in unknown laws.
That is religion.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#139357 Jun 27, 2013
One way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Show where they are the same as humans, as in other apes.
To clarify, let me point out the painfully obvious.

If I DID go and find links to prove it, would you say "Well done Chim, good point, I see what you are getting at now"?

No, you will continue with your moronic anti-knowledge anti-science crusade as normal, as if i had said nothing at all.

Why should I bother? To enlighten YOU??!!!?? You cannot even understand the basics of gravity yet presume to lecture everyone on what a nebula and a black hole is. Too freakin' funny.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#139358 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Your song and dance does nothing to validate evolution.
You know nothing about science.
You have a hypothesis...that life evolved.
You have no experimental evidence that it did happen or that it could happen.
Biological knowledge tells us that genetic information cannot be created through mutations, so you don't even have a viable mechanism to justify your intuitions.
You have faith that it happened...you have nothing more.
Your repeated blasphemous attacks against religious doctrines only validate my point...evolution is nothing less than a religion masquerading as science.
Blasphemy is manufacturing "Truths", attributing them to God and not owning up to what they REALLY are and why you perpetuate them.
Mind your 9th commandment, Bonzo.
Elohim

Branford, CT

#139359 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
It's irrelevant what version of intelligent design they believed in.
They believed in a higher power.
The notion that science does not lead one to believe in a higher power is false.
You cannot invoke any laws of science that validate your belief in atheistic evolution.
You are required to place faith in unknown laws.
That is religion.
There you go again confusing science with religion. For someone who claims to have gone to medical school, you have a poor understanding of what science is.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#139360 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
It's irrelevant what version of intelligent design they believed in.
They believed in a higher power.
The notion that science does not lead one to believe in a higher power is false.
You cannot invoke any laws of science that validate your belief in atheistic evolution.
You are required to place faith in unknown laws.
That is religion.
The development of theoretical explanations for the formation and functions of the universe and that which resides in it does not constitute religion.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#139361 Jun 27, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Your song and dance does nothing to validate evolution.
You know nothing about science.
You have a hypothesis...that life evolved.
You have no experimental evidence that it did happen or that it could happen.
Biological knowledge tells us that genetic information cannot be created through mutations, so you don't even have a viable mechanism to justify your intuitions.
You have faith that it happened...you have nothing more.
Your repeated blasphemous attacks against religious doctrines only validate my point...evolution is nothing less than a religion masquerading as science.
Wrong. There have been countless experiments that have shown that life could happen. You have even commented on some of them. For example the Urey-Miller experiment showed that with an early Earth atmosphere that amino acids could form and be concentrated. Your side said that it was not possible for even amino acids to form naturally. Of course once shown wrong they quickly moved their goal posts.

And you openly lie for Jesus. It has been shown to you countless times how new biologic information can form. Not only that we have experimental evidence that new biologic information does form.

You keep telling us that we have faith and yet we can pull up experiment after experiment showing evidence that we are right.

It is obvious that you still have no clue to the meaning of the word "evidence".

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) 13 min IB DaMann 58,094
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 34 min Endofdays 159,306
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr Eagle 12 27,275
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 5 hr Dogen 1,904
News Intelligent Design Education Day Feb 19 replaytime 2
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Feb 19 replaytime 219,597
News Betsy DeVos' Code Words for Creationism Offshoo... Feb 16 scientia potentia... 1
More from around the web