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 (Page 7,731)

Showing posts 154,601 - 154,620 of171,372
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158940
Nov 29, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
Wrong. There is no 'message'. No purpose. Simply survival in changing environments leading to new uses for old proteins and duplications leading to new proteins.
No writer.
Of course there's a message. There is a specific code for a specific protein and numerous other situations where a message is communicated. This is obvious.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158941
Nov 29, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
All of that was just "made-up". The Oort Cloud has never been observed. Much more likely is the comets were created at the same time as Creation, and we can observe that they cannot survive many trips around the sun as part of them sublimates with each pass, they can't last very long.
"For example, we have Haley’s comet which is quite well-known since it passes the Sun once every 75 years or so, and this comet will be completely sublimated and disappear after only 10,000 years or about 100 rotations around the Sun."
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/questi...
Now the rest of that secular article goes on to explain the Oort Cloud, etc., but of course, that is all just speculation.
Let us, for the sake of argument accept that the Oort Cloud is made up. How does that make comets much more likely to be the result of magical poofing by invisible Jewish wizardry?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158942
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell that to your neophyte, evotard minion.
As opposed to the creotard minion?

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158943
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Let us, for the sake of argument accept that the Oort Cloud is made up. How does that make comets much more likely to be the result of magical poofing by invisible Jewish wizardry?
You mean if that is much more likely than "Everything from Nothing and Nobody for no Reason"?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158944
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
OK- Show it to me. Dazzle me with your celestial mechanics and math.

Simple logic would suffice, if only you could comprehend simple logic.

You claim science knowledge but demonstrate ignorance.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158945
Nov 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, but Urb claims complexity and order ARE the same. I still have no idea how it's supposed to be measured though.
Neither does he.
:-/
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/files...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158946
Nov 29, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
How would you know? No one has ever seen the imaginary "Oort Cloud".
So basically, there's this huge comet nursery many light years away surrounding our solar system and a wizard named "Oort" who occasionally gets bored and conjures up his magic to overcome the laws of nature and gets a hankering to fling another comet towards the sun to entertain Earthlings just for giggles?
What laws of nature do they need to overcome? You ain't never heard of gravity?

As our sun moves around along with the rest of the galaxy it also moves up and down. This process repeats itself every 2 million years or so. As it moves up and down it passes through the thickest part of the galactic swirl were there are more stars. More stars means more mass. More mass means an increase in gravitational pull. This is enough to disturb the orbits of Oort cloud objects, and some of them inevitably get thrown our way.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158947
Nov 29, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course there's a message. There is a specific code for a specific protein and numerous other situations where a message is communicated. This is obvious.
"Pizza Hut is open"?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158948
Nov 29, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
All of that was just "made-up". The Oort Cloud has never been observed. Much more likely is the comets were created at the same time as Creation, and we can observe that they cannot survive many trips around the sun as part of them sublimates with each pass, they can't last very long.
"For example, we have Haley’s comet which is quite well-known since it passes the Sun once every 75 years or so, and this comet will be completely sublimated and disappear after only 10,000 years or about 100 rotations around the Sun."
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/questi...
Now the rest of that secular article goes on to explain the Oort Cloud, etc., but of course, that is all just speculation.

What ignorance. You don't even understand that Oort cloud comets have trajectories that take them so far out from the sun that a single orbit could be millions of years. And most Oort cloud comets are still out there. In 4.5 billion years only a fraction of them may have come cascading to the inner solar system. That explains why we are still getting first timers like Ison after 4.5 billion years. Oort cloud comets come from somewhere, don't they? Or does Yahweh just poof them into existence whenever he things we need something purdy to look at?

U R iggernant. You keep making up your just-so beliefs to rationalize your religion. As if recognizing the contributions of science would invalidate religion.

Putz.



The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158949
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean if that is much more likely than "Everything from Nothing and Nobody for no Reason"?
I notice you've shifted the goalposts from discussing the Oort Cloud back to the point of universal origin. That's a shift of 7 BILLION years or so.

Not to mention the fact you brought up the subject of atheism again, even though theology STILL has no bearing on science.

I accept your concession.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158950
Nov 29, 2013
 
Urban Cowboy wrote:
So pick out the passages which state how CSI is measured. I told you how to measure complexity in just a couple of sentences.(shrug)

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158951
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell that to your neophyte, evotard minion.

You mean we don't know what elements are necessary to make organic compounds?

Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen and phosphorous are what make up DNA and every other organic molecule.

This is HS chemistry.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158952
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
How would you know? No one has ever seen the imaginary "Oort Cloud".
So basically, there's this huge comet nursery many light years away surrounding our solar system and a wizard named "Oort" who occasionally gets bored and conjures up his magic to overcome the laws of nature and gets a hankering to fling another comet towards the sun to entertain Earthlings just for giggles?

No. You have not been paying attention. This is not a nursery so much as an old folks home. These comets are billions of years old. They just never had a close fling around the sun and don't get one till something disturbs their orbit (and that is pretty rare out there).

You are again evidencing projection.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158953
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course there's a message. There is a specific code for a specific protein and numerous other situations where a message is communicated. This is obvious.

That is chemistry, not a message. You need to have intelligence for a message and you don't have evidence of any.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158954
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean if that is much more likely than "Everything from Nothing and Nobody for no Reason"?

I think you are confusing the origin of god with the origin of the universe.

But thank you for demonstrating the inadequacy of "common sense" when attempting to understand a 14 billion year old universe.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158955
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Urban Cowboy wrote:

Discovery.org .

ROTFLMFAO.

You would quote a science site if you had anything more than just-so stories.

I take this as an admission that you cannot define complexity.

Fine. Next subject.

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158956
Nov 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
"Pizza Hut is open"?
I will say this: For an evotard, you sure have a great sense of humor!

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Level 2

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158957
Nov 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

The Dude wrote:
Actually you're closer to the answer than you think. During pregnancy a zygote is not conscious. But a baby is. Ergo at some point there is a time when a non-conscious organism becomes conscious - purely via naturally occurring chemical processes I might add.
But what IS that point? There more than likely isn't one. It's more likely a gradual thing, as the chemistry slowly develops the body over the months consciousness gradually develops. An analogy would be like waking up, very very slowly.
Wait a minute. When you say that I'm closer than I think to the answer, that implies you know the answer :)

First of all, no one knows the true nature of consciousness therefore one cannot claim that something is unconscious just because it does not respond to a stimulus. Who knows how many dimensions there are to 'awareness'?

Maybe molecules do possess some small obscure aspect of consciousness that we cannot begin to imagine? Or maybe consciousness passes from the mother to the baby at some stage? Or maybe you're right that it is just an emergent property.

Certainly neither you nor I or anyone else can *know* we are right about consciousness. Anyway, I don't really have a belief on whether a zygote is conscious but that doesn't change my belief that consciousness can be eternal.

I'll agree that it seems logical to assume emergent consciousness but we still do not have solid evidence; all we have is association of consciousness but not a mechanism or an understanding. I'm not allowed to scientifically claim an eternal consciousness but neither is anyone else allowed to claim it isn't as eternal as energy itself, because no one knows enough about consciousness. No one.

You'd think we would understand something we deal with our entire lives. We might even be aware during sleep just that we can't remember due to our hardware being turned off.
Of course fundies would claim consciousness is a magic thing that is inserted by God at the moment of conception.
They can claim it all they want but to try getting science to accept it without evidence is crossing the line of sanity.
No matter how much someone says they love their partner, it's always a threesome!
Good thing I'm not religious; how could I compete with God, in bed?

Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158958
Nov 29, 2013
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
What laws of nature do they need to overcome? You ain't never heard of gravity?
As our sun moves around along with the rest of the galaxy it also moves up and down. This process repeats itself every 2 million years or so. As it moves up and down it passes through the thickest part of the galactic swirl were there are more stars. More stars means more mass. More mass means an increase in gravitational pull. This is enough to disturb the orbits of Oort cloud objects, and some of them inevitably get thrown our way.
Sure it is!

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#158959
Nov 29, 2013
 
Pokay wrote:
<quoted text> Wait a minute. When you say that I'm closer than I think to the answer, that implies you know the answer :)
First of all, no one knows the true nature of consciousness therefore one cannot claim that something is unconscious just because it does not respond to a stimulus. Who knows how many dimensions there are to 'awareness'?
Maybe molecules do possess some small obscure aspect of consciousness that we cannot begin to imagine? Or maybe consciousness passes from the mother to the baby at some stage? Or maybe you're right that it is just an emergent property.
Certainly neither you nor I or anyone else can *know* we are right about consciousness. Anyway, I don't really have a belief on whether a zygote is conscious but that doesn't change my belief that consciousness can be eternal.
I'll agree that it seems logical to assume emergent consciousness but we still do not have solid evidence; all we have is association of consciousness but not a mechanism or an understanding. I'm not allowed to scientifically claim an eternal consciousness but neither is anyone else allowed to claim it isn't as eternal as energy itself, because no one knows enough about consciousness. No one.
You'd think we would understand something we deal with our entire lives. We might even be aware during sleep just that we can't remember due to our hardware being turned off.
<quoted text>They can claim it all they want but to try getting science to accept it without evidence is crossing the line of sanity.
<quoted text>Good thing I'm not religious; how could I compete with God, in bed?
Maybe you are over imaginative.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 154,601 - 154,620 of171,372
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
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.

11 Users are viewing the Evolution Debate Forum right now

Search the Evolution Debate Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Chicken or the egg. Lets settle this 2 min TurkanaBoy 43
The Universe is fine-tuned for life 3 min wondering 26
It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 28 min wondering 133,974
Modern YEC is Not An Aberration of Traditional ... 34 min TurkanaBoy 113
Big Bang? 2 hr wondering 102
British Ban Teaching Creationism As Science, Sh... 2 hr wondering 103
Skull Valley lawmaker wants both sides of clima... (Feb '13) 3 hr litesong 1,633
•••
•••