Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180366 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.

Mugwump

UK

#156452 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol. Hey, you claimed you wanted me to bring new thinking, so I tried to ignore everything else and offer what not one of you utilizes, but like a child, you use childishness.
I wont bother explaining your stupidity, you choose to hold tight to it.
Hilarious, you unwittingly (what else) answer RPTs question and contradict your own light theory nonsense - so dishonestly refuse to admit it, and insist you 'can't be bothered'

Great work as always jimbo

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#156453 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
The evo children beat every subject to death, thousands of times over.
The definition of insanity is, doing the same things over and over, expecting a different outcome.
If a persons words are worth something, they need say it only once.
Which explains why you keep posting the same "new science" crapola over and over.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#156454 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
I've written over 20 new things for science and that's being modest.
To bring new thinking, there needs to. E new subjects----and, people that can offer intelligent rebuttal, Even though I brought much that was new without intelligent rebuttal. I brought so much new because I hate groups of children, that were taught in school, to act like children, that have nothing of value, so they run around, trying to hurt others.
If just one here would challenge me with intelligent rebuttal, I could bring new thinking on a consistent basis.
So what one new bit of thinking have you brought to science, just one.
We'll have to get back to you on this. Right now, everyone's working on developing a theory as to what makes you such a disagreeable pr1ck.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#156455 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol. Hey, you claimed you wanted me to bring new thinking, so I tried to ignore everything else and offer what not one of you utilizes, but like a child, you use childishness.
I wont bother explaining your stupidity, you choose to hold tight to it.
Wow! MASSIVE projection!

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#156456 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
You are the NFL vs CTE---traumatic brain injury.
You are the tobacco heads testifying before Congress.
Your teachers pet schooling has brought you to the childishness you project.
You offer nothing of value and you hate any that do offer things of value, that's what schools teach.
Ah! The teacher's pet thing again. Have any idea why you were never the teacher's pet, Jimbo?
Mugwump

Southam, UK

#156461 Oct 11, 2013
Am guessing another 5 posts before he gets into the Jews and 'queers'

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#156465 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
Such a waste. You morons beat every subject into the ground, thousands of times over, just as you have been doing with entropy. That is the opposite of intelligent thinking.
New thinking comes from the mixing of subjects, just as should be done in school.
Every child learns differently. That's why mixing subjects is such a great help.
Children need to talk about what they learn, while it is fresh and how it might relate to each different class.
Searching for ways to connect everything, creates new and creative thinking.
When a child learns the wrong thing, no matter how many times YOU say it's right. It's still wrong, the answers maybe multiple choice. But only one answer is correct.
You creationist seem to think the answer can be different if you repeat the wrong answer enough it will become true.
Nope repeat it 1000x and you'll still be wrong.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#156466 Oct 11, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Where you are wrong is the isolated tribes don't know religion as what you call religion. It falls on survival and beliefs.
"Survival and beliefs" are part of any social organization, from hunting/gathering groups to tribes and even to nations. Economics (the use and control of resources) is at the heart of wars both large and small.

I do not think that the beliefs of tribal religions are any less "civilized" than beliefs of more complex societies. All religions call on supernatural powers or transcendental knowledge as glue to hold society together.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#156468 Oct 11, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
Here is the way I see it.
Creager is decimated for his ridiculous paper shot through with high school level errors.
o His paper is excellent and contains no errors. A bunch of amateur evotards with no understanding of the material can make all the claims they want but it's meaningless if they're all wrong.
o All you did was concoct schemes to try and foil by deception and trickery but they all fell to the wayside and Creager's math and predictions withstood all of it.
o It just shows that math and physics is not something you argue your way around although this is exactly what you tried to do.
o You insisted that statistical entropy is measured in J/K from Boltzmann's constant even though you knew it is a measure of probabilities. And then Poly slipped and agreed with me, that stopped you from using that false tactic.
o Then you tried to confabulate the statistical entropy formula into information theory entropy and continued this even though you know it is completely different application mean for the information content of a message.
o And then for your latest scam, you two conspirators actually invented some imaginary “before and after scenario” so you could somehow slip in this ridiculous idea of exit energy. And even when presented with the clear-cut example of applying energy two different ways (crew vs. bomb) to raw materials. Even though this is clearly two separate events (house vs. debris) that are being compared.
o But I knew where this was going all along when you both insisted that a bomb blast is more ordered than a construction crew. So I really knew what was going on all along. I was many chess moves ahead the whole time. I was using you guys as an experiment to see how far you would be willing to take this charade.
o And Poly, if you use your laser example to disprove the predictions, you must also agree that energy can have ordered. In fact you stated that lasers are very, very ordered. However, this must also be measured by equivalent microstates! And it surely you can see that the photons – even though they may be concentrated by the amplification – any particular photon particle could be positioned at any microstate position, i.e., it is not position critical. So no, a laser is not ordered.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#156469 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
For over 200 years, the lesson of the teachers pet, has been to teach jealousy, hate and stupidity. I could see, hear and feel that, from the first grade.
Schools teach copy and paste. That's why none of you bring any new thinking, but you're too stupid to care.
Here's my latest theory (new thinking) of why you are such a hopeless case: You've never been able to look beyond your own wants, so it never enters your mind what thought processes other people must go through. You cannot comprehend anyone else's original thoughts because those thoughts didn't come from your own head.

So do you agree with this new theory?

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#156470 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
So your safety is when someone else lies for you.
When you let others speak for you, you give away your integrity, if you ever had any.
You weren't making a joke, you were grasping at straws, but hey, keep lying to yourself, its your
coat of many colors.
You don't even tell yourself the truth.

Who are you talking to when you go on these little rants? Do you even know? Are you responding to voices in your head? If so I need to change your diagnosis.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#156471 Oct 11, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you mean the tribes that know no Christianity and not only kill people they see as a threat over water, food, area or just because they are different? Some of them also eat the people they kill. That is called cannibalism.
But then again most hunters believe if you are a true hunter you should not kill it unless you will eat it.

You seem unaware that civilizations were around long before Christianity nor that there STILL countries that are not based at all on Christianity.

Further, brutality is not at all limited to non-christians.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#156473 Oct 11, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
o And Poly, if you use your laser example to disprove the predictions, you must also agree that energy can have ordered.
More specifically, the photons are ordered.
In fact you stated that lasers are very, very ordered. However, this must also be measured by equivalent microstates!
Yes. In fact, since photons are bosons, they can all be in the *same* micro-state. In lasers, this doesn't quite happen, but it is much closer than ordinary light, for example.
And it surely you can see that the photons – even though they may be concentrated by the amplification – any particular photon particle could be positioned at any microstate position, i.e., it is not position critical. So no, a laser is not ordered.
Position is not how you determine a micro-state in this context. You have to count the number of available quantum states that are equivalent to the situation. In particular, since the photons all have nearly the same frequency and phase, they are indistinguishable particles. This leads to very few micro-states.

One problem you are having is that re-positioning of indistinguishable particles gives the *same* micro-state. In classical treatments, that lead to a division by a factor of N!. In quantum treatments, the symmetry of the wave functions plays a similar role.

So, yes, a laser is very ordered.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#156478 Oct 11, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You're drunk. And you don't understand faith. Not even close.
You got that right. Too many Hoegartens and Canadian Club.

Oh well. Happens occasionally.

Nevertheless, Creager's paper is in the dustbin, and he would not even pass a first year physics course. Whoever "peer reviewed" that paper should be embarrassed.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#156480 Oct 11, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You got that right. Too many Hoegartens and Canadian Club.
Oh well. Happens occasionally.
Nevertheless, Creager's paper is in the dustbin, and he would not even pass a first year physics course. Whoever "peer reviewed" that paper should be embarrassed.
That is why creationist "peer review" is such a joke. It does not even take an expert in the field to debunk Creager, or almost any other creationist paper.

And as much as creationists hate real peer review they have never been able to demonstrate any bias by it.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#156481 Oct 11, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
o His paper is excellent and contains no errors. A bunch of amateur evotards with no understanding of the material can make all the claims they want but it's meaningless if they're all wrong.
o All you did was concoct schemes to try and foil by deception and trickery but they all fell to the wayside and Creager's math and predictions withstood all of it.
o It just shows that math and physics is not something you argue your way around although this is exactly what you tried to do.
Wrong again. His paper contains obvious and elementary errors. As you have been shown.
o You insisted that statistical entropy is measured in J/K from Boltzmann's constant even though you knew it is a measure of probabilities. And then Poly slipped and agreed with me, that stopped you from using that false tactic.
Wrong again. And the only time you can use a "k" with no units is in information theory which does not apply to thermodynamics...not only that but you assured me you were NOT using the information definition when I pointed it out.

You seem to think there is a third option - a unitless application to TD. There isn't.

And Polymath made exactly the same point as I did.

You are hopelessly lost.
o Then you tried to confabulate the statistical entropy formula into information theory entropy and continued this even though you know it is completely different application mean for the information content of a message.
Wrong again. I looked at the information theory definition because that was obviously what you were using in your attempt to claim that units were irrelevant. Your problem is, you do not seem to even realise you were doing it. LOG instead of ln was one give away. The belief that you could ignore the units in Boltzmann's constant was the other.

I merely pointed out to you why the information version of entropy was not applicable.
o And then for your latest scam, you two conspirators actually invented some imaginary “before and after scenario” so you could somehow slip in this ridiculous idea of exit energy.
No scam. Exit energy was there from my earliest remarks. And if you even had the slightest understanding of what you were talking about, you would know that any entropy change formula MUST have a before and after. "change" man, this is basic stuff.
And even when presented with the clear-cut example of applying energy two different ways (crew vs. bomb) to raw materials. Even though this is clearly two separate events (house vs. debris) that are being compared.
And I said right from the start, that thermodynamically you MUST look at what happens to every part of the relevant system and that includes the waste heat generated.

And Creager's inexplicable "cooling reduces entropy...therefore its the ordered application of energy that reduces entropy" is worse than silly. Its just flagrantly twisting - a lie that you cannot see because you want so much to believe him.
o But I knew where this was going all along when you both insisted that a bomb blast is more ordered than a construction crew.
I knew where this was going when you first stated that lie. And even after correcting you 10 times, you repeat it again. You can only defend your position by lying. Says it all.

I said, and still say, that the TOTAL disorder created by the crew is greater than the bomb blast when you include the full picture, which includes the waste heat generated in the building of the house. The mere fact that it takes far more fuel to build a house than to wreck one tells you that.

But you do not even understand that the fuel is the energy source.
Clueless.
So I really knew what was going on all along.
You have defeated nobody but yourself and lost the chance to actually learn something. I pity you. You have no right to be this stupid.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#156482 Oct 11, 2013
one way or another wrote:
You are the NFL vs CTE---traumatic brain injury.
You are the tobacco heads testifying before Congress.
Your teachers pet schooling has brought you to the childishness you project.
You offer nothing of value and you hate any that do offer things of value, that's what schools teach.

Mirror mirror, on the wall....

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#156487 Oct 11, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You're drunk. And you don't understand faith. Not even close.
Drunk or sober, I'm pretty sure that just about everybody here has a clear understanding of faith. It's not understanding much of anything else >because of faith< that plagues certain persons.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#156488 Oct 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
So, yes, a laser is very ordered.
BUT HOW CAN IT BE WHEN IT MAKES SO MUCH DISORDER?!?

http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt117/Cree...

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#156491 Oct 11, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
BUT HOW CAN IT BE WHEN IT MAKES SO MUCH DISORDER?!?
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt117/Cree...
This way.
http://lowcadence.com/wp-content/uploads/2013...

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) 14 min Into The Night 85,544
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 43 min Simon 165,406
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 46 min Subduction Zone 4,867
What's your religion? 1 hr Dogen 23
God hates Tennessee 13 hr MakinProgress 5
Experiment In Evolution, Genetic Algorithms and... Jan 15 was auch immer 8
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) Jan 15 Dogen 33,127
More from around the web