Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180363 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

#153933 Sep 20, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a "just-so" answer founded on special pleading.
You assume that when a person dies of hypothermia and his body begins autolyzing, that the heat being released through autolysis outweighs the disorder created. How do you know that? Can the autolysis be reverse by raising the body temperature?
Suppose you took a living person, set him in a 50 degree pool of water, and waited for him to die of hypothermia. Suppose that with every degree drop in body temperature, you plotted the decrease in entropy. Suppose you had one hour worth of data, and the person suddenly expired. One minute later you measure the entropy. It will be much greater. Yet you assume that the minimal amount of heat expended in autolysis outweighs the disorder created. If that were true, then you should be able to measure an increase in body temperature immediately following death. That is definitely not the case.
I don't expect you to be able to actually quantitate these values, due to the inherent complexity of such a task...but I think that your explanations are merely reflective of your precommittment to your paradigm of thinking. My challenge to your logic, that of explaining immediate postmortem autolysis in terms of the SLoT, poses a serious problem to your explanations that cannot be logically explained away in a couple of sentences.
Correction: Can the autolysis be reversed by LOWERING the body temperature even more to counteract the heat loss? Absolutely not.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#153934 Sep 20, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a "just-so" answer founded on special pleading.
You assume that when a person dies of hypothermia and his body begins autolyzing, that the heat being released through autolysis outweighs the disorder created. How do you know that? Can the autolysis be reverse by raising the body temperature?
No, that is impossible because the heat released is high in entropy. Simple raising of temperature does not reverse loss of entropy thorugh heat.
Suppose you took a living person, set him in a 50 degree pool of water, and waited for him to die of hypothermia. Suppose that with every degree drop in body temperature, you plotted the decrease in entropy. Suppose you had one hour worth of data, and the person suddenly expired. One minute later you measure the entropy. It will be much greater.
Actually, I would expect that the entropy would NOT drop more for that degree of body temperature drop. Why do you think otherwise?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#153935 Sep 20, 2013
And polymath, I am sure you could do the problem I gave in your sleep. So no kibitzing please.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#153937 Sep 20, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
On the other hand if the faster moving galaxies are the furthest away and the slower moving ones are closer then the faster moving ones will not ever be caught up to. They will always be out ahead.
There are two sources of motion for galaxies. On the small scale there is the movement caused by gravitational attraction between the various local galaxies. That is why we know the Andromeda galaxy is going to collide with us. As distance between the galaxies increase the motion is more dependent upon the rate of expansion of the universe.

Remember the balloon analogy. If two ants are very close to each other the fact that the balloon is being inflated has very little effect on their motion relative to each other. If you have two ants greatly separated by distance the inflation of the balloon can be many times the rate that the ants can move on their own.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#153939 Sep 20, 2013
kleinman wrote:
<quoted text>
Quality and quantity both matter when it comes to the mutation and selection phenomenon. Quality is dependent on the environmental conditions. Quantity is necessary because in small populations, the probability that a beneficial mutation occurring somewhere in the population is small. But again, that is the question that I keep asking you evolutionists, how does quantity (size of the subpopulation) affect the evolutionary process?
Quality will allow a species to thrive and thus generate a large population.
Quantity will just get eaten.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#153941 Sep 20, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
I wish we (Chimney, Poly, HTS, etc.) would carefully follow me through step by step from both a math/physics perspective and a real-world example perspective with this issue that the SLoT violates the TOE. There have been some fits and starts and much showboating but it is very clear to me that it does. I have presented equations and presented examples but we need to calmly and carefully walk step by step through the process. We need to avoid distractions about religion, etc., and focus on this!
Sorry, but your position is Goddidit with magic. That makes all discussions of evidence utterly superfluous to your position, even if your claims about thermodynamics were correct. It just so happens that they aren't.(shrug)

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#153942 Sep 20, 2013
one way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Then by all means, show where science claims that all the fartherest galaxies are moving faster than the closer galaxies you moron.
No where does science make that claim, but hey, we'll wait for you to show the proof through science
You can double talk the morons here, but I know better.
"Hubble's Law"

Hubble's law or Lemaître's law is the name for the theory in physical cosmology (proven by observation) that:(1) all objects observed in deep space (intergalactic space) are found to have a Doppler shift observable relative velocity to Earth, and to each other; and (2) that this Doppler-shift-measured velocity, of various galaxies receding from the Earth, is proportional to their distance from the Earth and all other interstellar bodies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble 's_law

Note #2.

Putz.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#153943 Sep 20, 2013
one way or another wrote:
To deceive any, one must deceive themselves and that is the worst thing one can do to their own brain.
Time is on my side.

How does deceiving yourself put time on your side?

Kudos on admitting you were wrong. It shows you are capable of it. Now we will expect it.

It is dangerous to raise peoples expectations like that.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#153944 Sep 20, 2013
one way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Then by all means, show where science claims that all the fartherest galaxies are moving faster than the closer galaxies you moron.
No where does science make that claim, but hey, we'll wait for you to show the proof through science
You can double talk the morons here, but I know better.
Here you go:

http://www.astronomynotes.com/galaxy/s7.htm

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#153945 Sep 20, 2013
one way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
The poly moron said they were and here you are repeating his BS. Unless you can prove what he claims, YOU SHOULD never repeat what the morons claim.
Science never made the claim that all the outer galaxies are moving faster than the inside ones.
Plus, no onexan define what's farther out.

Indeed, inside and outside are relative terms here.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#153946 Sep 20, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
"Hubble's Law"
Hubble's law or Lemaître's law is the name for the theory in physical cosmology (proven by observation) that:(1) all objects observed in deep space (intergalactic space) are found to have a Doppler shift observable relative velocity to Earth, and to each other; and (2) that this Doppler-shift-measured velocity, of various galaxies receding from the Earth, is proportional to their distance from the Earth and all other interstellar bodies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble 's_law
Note #2.
Putz.

Yes, but IF he is focusing on the fact that we appear the same way to those far off galaxies then he is correct.

It could be a broken clock effect, but I like to give him the benefit of doubt.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#153947 Sep 20, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:

All motion is relative. I am taking Jimbo's side in this.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#153948 Sep 20, 2013
forreal wrote:
The Mayfly is not in the evolution cycle it doesn't have time to evolve.
Is it born?

Then it has time to evolve.

Individuals do not evolve during their lifetime. What DOES happen is that an organism will reproduce, and that offspring will be slightly different (due to mutations). So a Mayfly has offspring, then that offspring will be slightly different. And if that one has offspring, then that offspring will be slightly different again. And so on and so forth. Over time these changes accumulate. That is evolution.
HTS

Englewood, CO

#153949 Sep 20, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, that is impossible because the heat released is high in entropy. Simple raising of temperature does not reverse loss of entropy thorugh heat.
<quoted text>
Actually, I would expect that the entropy would NOT drop more for that degree of body temperature drop. Why do you think otherwise?
Let me rephrase this...

A person suddendly dies of hypothermia when his core body temperature gradually drops to 65 degrees.
Autolysis immediately begins.
His body temperature drops more...now it's 50 degrees...45 degrees. You cannot reverse the autolysis by lowering the body temperature. You cannot simply state that the lowered entropy generated through cooling counterbalances the massive decomposition. The heat generated through autolysis is minimal...
Decomposition occurs in an irreversible manner, regardless of how much you cool the body. Yes, you can refrigerate the body to 42 degrees and that will slow it down substantially, but it will not stop it.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#153950 Sep 20, 2013
forreal wrote:
The Mayfly needs to hatch, Fly, Mate, Produce, eat, and Die, all this has to occurs in one day and not another day to think it over, an error cannot be tolerated.
Then it may die.

But there tends to be rather a lot of Mayflies. So unless their population is reduced to drastically dangerous levels there isn't any problem.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#153951 Sep 20, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it is very rarely wrong. Why do you twist this into the opposite way? I don't understand why you would do that.
Because you are always guilty of projection.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#153952 Sep 20, 2013
forreal wrote:
A Mayfly cant ever put overtime to make evolution work.
They don't need to.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#153953 Sep 20, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Correction: Can the autolysis be reversed by LOWERING the body temperature even more to counteract the heat loss? Absolutely not.

Why would you expect it to?

Do you think autolysis = entropy?
HTS

Englewood, CO

#153954 Sep 20, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The intelligence didn't change, so there was no entropy change in the intelligence. So it is irrelevant to SLoT.
What I'm saying is that energy alone cannot create a house. Intelligence is required. That intelligence had to come from somewhere... and according to the SLoT, a huge amount of heat must have been expended to create such order, evidenced by the fact that all the energy in the universe cannot create order in the way intelligence can. Yet you keep stating that DNA is not very ordered, implying that it could have come into existence through naturalistic means.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#153955 Sep 20, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's where I'm struggling...
The order created by the construction crew not only required energy resulting in heat loss in the process... it required intelligence. Focusing a beam of heat on a stack of construction materials will do nothing in building a house. So now you need to deal with the question... how much heat was expended in creating the intelligence to create the house?
Ask your parents.
HTS wrote:
and how does such a paradigm conform to your logic that DNA [the creator of intelligence] has less entropy than ice?
???

I thought the creator of intelligence was intelligence!

:-/

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) 3 min Into The Night 87,614
What's your religion? 3 hr 15th Dalai Lama 774
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 5 hr Samuel Patre 166,398
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 13 hr Wisdom of Ages 5,843
Are Asians/whites more evolved? (Sep '07) Feb 21 Anonymous 1,825
Scientific Method Feb 15 stinky 20
Evolving A Maze Solving Robot Feb 6 Untangler 2
More from around the web