Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180369 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.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#163001 Jan 25, 2014
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
The Genesis account does not conflict with reality. It is the "Six-24-hour-day" creationists who conflict with reality.

The Genesis account of Six-24-hour-days.

Glad to hear you agree that Genesis conflicts with reality even if you did not intend to.

Do you remember losing this argument before? No? Then perhaps an appointment with a neurologist would be in order.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#163002 Jan 25, 2014
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Anyway, the fossil order is not a problem. It's even better for a flood than for evolution. Most of the lower fossils are random evolution-wise but predictable flood-wise.

You like to say this but it simply isn't true. With evolution the fossil record makes sense. With creotardism you have to make all sorts of shit up to try to make it work. And it still does not work.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> You would predict that creatures on the bottom of the sea would be the first to be buried. Next, you expect to find fish and this is what you find.

This is not what creationism would predict. Why would fish (if any) not be at the very top. Actually there should be no fish since the flood is described as killing off creatures that breath air. You would have to have a VERY powerful and damaging flood which is the sort of thing that many creationists are against as there should be evidence of a flood like this. Maybe you should check your own sources.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> And by that same reasoning - it was a flood you know - the larger animals would have sought higher ground, so that is why the most able are found at the highest layers.

There are very large animals that are buried very deep. Early dinosaurs, very large fish...... Yet there are very tiny deep sea creatures that are not found in the fossil record at all or not till near top level strata.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text> Going to see the Cleveland Orchestra tonight and leaving in half an hour. Gotta go...

oooh. What are they preforming? I recently saw the Indianapolis Symphony do Verdi's Requiem. It was breathtaking. The best performance of the piece I have ever heard, even factoring in that live is always better than recordings.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#163003 Jan 25, 2014
Urban Cowboy wrote:
I forgot to mention the lowest layer I would predict would be the algae and fungi because that should be pre-flood and they fossilized slowly in non-catastrophic conditions.(There is a name for what they make but I forget it right now.) I'm literally out the door...

LOL. Nice just-so story. Too bad we have recent examples of algae and fungi fossils.

And you have to COMPLETELY ignore dating.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#163004 Jan 25, 2014
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Stromatolites!

Trees from swamp regions that have had multiple flood layers formed around them. What about them?

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#163005 Jan 25, 2014
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Trees from swamp regions that have had multiple flood layers formed around them. What about them?
UC has the great flood ring around the inside of his skull.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#163007 Jan 25, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
UC has the great flood ring around the inside of his skull.

Hydrocephelic, eh?
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#163008 Jan 25, 2014
HillStart wrote:
Text is a poor analogue for genetic code. It is not possible to tear half the pages from one book and staple them to half the pages from another and have a resulting book that makes sense, yet this is what happened to your DNA when you were conceived. The analogy with written text does not make sense, so it is a poor choice for you to use. Your assertion that changes of this type can only be detrimental appears feeble when presented with the evidence that a change of this type resulted in the new variant out-competing the old one to the point where it comprised 99% of the population.
More like one paragraph that was repeated twice in a row as the sequences that duplicated are actually back to back. And this certainly doesn't explain where the sequence originated in the first place, does it?
HillStart wrote:
Actually, there are many instances of recipes containing repetition. There's a whole list of twice-baked foods on Wikipedia, not to mention the repetitive folding required to make puff pastry, double-frying, etc. Your analogies are inappropriate and, worse than that, they fail to make the points you are aiming for.

Equivocation. I said specifically place the meatloaf in the oven at 425 degrees and bake for 45 minutes. If you did this twice it would be ruined, wouldn't it? You can't just make up some other recipe, it has to be the genetic code calls for, the exact instructions.
HillStart wrote:
Your claim that these organisms are less fit than their wild type ancestors is laughable. Quoting from Lenski's work: "All twelve populations underwent rapid improvement in fitness". This was even before the Cit+ variant evolved. Once it appeared, after 30,000 generations, the population exploded to over 8 times its previous size. So, in summary, we are already starting from a population with higher fitness than the wild type. We then add this new mutation and produce the Cit+ variant. This variant is so successful it increases the population size by over 8 times and it outnumbers its Cit- counterparts 99 to 1. Let me quote Wikipedia: Fitness is "equal to the average contribution to the gene pool of the next generation that is made by an average individual of the specified genotype or phenotype". The Cit+ variant makes up 99% of the population - it is fitter than the Cit- variant. There is nothing left to argue here.
Apparently you don't understand. If those mutant E. coli were returned to their normal environment, they would no longer be able to discern or differentiate when or which digestion is appropriate. They have lost functionality. It is as if you have a perfectly good working lock that only works with the correct key but then the lock is broken and other keys can unlock it as well.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#163009 Jan 25, 2014
HillStart wrote:
I'm also amused at the idea E. coli has tissues, limbs and organs.
Amused? You don't think bacteria has flagella?(A limb) You don't think bacteria has any organelles?(A ribosome) You don't think bacteria can have any tissue?(Two or more connecting cells) But I wasn't even referring to existing parts; I was talking about the possibility of developing a new one! Of course that is pretty far fetched as you well know!
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#163010 Jan 25, 2014
Dogen wrote:
oooh. What are they preforming? I recently saw the Indianapolis Symphony do Verdi's Requiem. It was breathtaking. The best performance of the piece I have ever heard, even factoring in that live is always better than recordings.
http://www.clevelandorchestramiami.com/concer...

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#163011 Jan 25, 2014
Whether we were created from God or came from a muddy soup, everyone that is reading this will never know for we all are going to die and will die before any of us know the answer of when and where life came from. It just amazes me that with this one and only life we have, so many spend so much time arguing were and how we got here that they don't fully enjoy the life they have. Not one of you will convince the other that you are right. Yes I come here out of boredom but I don't let it control m to such a serious point as some of you all do. This is topix, it will ever make a difference, Do you understand that?

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#163012 Jan 25, 2014
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Come on Chum, I've been here for over 10 years and still haven't seen any.
Its the Bible you worship, not God.

As a Believer, you no doubt accept that God created the laws of nature and left it to humans to work out what we can of those laws. Within that framework, the only sensible view can be that God was content to let primitive Jews frame an understanding of creation based on the little that they knew, because God's preoccupation was with moral teaching, not trying to explain particle physics to illiterate goat herders.

Now we know enough of those laws to rule out the literal creation story on multiple fronts.

You refuse to see that only because you are afraid that if we question the most primitive fables of the Bible, we question the moral lessons as well. And so we should! And we have, thereby going further than the Bible itself, in abolishing slavery or the treatment of women and children as chattels.

Thus even from your position it should be obvious that if the Bible was God inspired, it was put in its form as a guideline relative to the capacities and understanding of the people it was written for, not as an endpoint, but as a starting point for our growing understanding of the physical laws of the universe and the moral laws of man.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#163013 Jan 25, 2014
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Come on Chum, I've been here for over 10 years and still haven't seen any.
I am going to speak out of turn here but in this 10 years you have basically wasted here what did you expect and hope to accomplish? Could you not have done something better in the last 10 years with all the time you have put in here while still getting no results? I am just asking your opinion.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#163014 Jan 25, 2014
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
That does NOT fulfill the criteria at all. There is no new information. New, meaning never before existing. Simple sequence duplication adds no new information in written text and it doesn't add any new information in the genetic code.
I have a recipe for raisin scones. One instruction is "add a cup of raisins". If that instruction is duplicated, its definitely new information and it affects the scones. Positively, if you love raisins.

So, its new information.

A mere analogy? No.

The addition of repeated instructions (genes) to produce amylase resulted in better digestions of starches, and humans living in areas with a long history of starch based diets tend to have more duplicates of the amylase producing gene and higher levels of salivary amylase as a result.

Not only that, but the gene itself comes in more than one variant and any variation that changes the enzymatic action slightly is potentially useful in encountering variations in starches.

So, gene duplication and variation = new information and = adaptive variation and does not equal "degeneration".

You "no new information" claim is falsified by the facts.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#163015 Jan 25, 2014
HillStart wrote:
<quoted text>
An interesting idea. I want to examine it to see whether it has any theoretical basis. This is going to be long, so please bear with me while I try to post multiple messages (this might appear twice, or after the second message...)
Your scenario is that:
1. We have a starting population of organisms with no mutations.
2. With each generation, mutations accumulate.
3. If there are too many mutations, the organism will die.
Your conclusion is that, eventually, the entire population will die from their mutations and the species will be extinct.
You have one more axiom that is very important. You do not believe there are any beneficial mutations. I will ignore this one for now, but I promise I will come back to it.
I modelled a scenario like this one. I made the following assumptions:
1. Each generation, an individual would produce 1 offspring.
2. Each offspring was subject to bad mutation, modelled as a Poisson process with lambda=1 (i.e. each offspring has an average of 1 more mutation).
3. Each offspring was also subject to good mutation, modelled as a Poisson process with lambda=0.1 (i.e. on average, 1 good mutation per 10 offspring).
4. The population was resource-constrained in some way (e.g. competition for food) and were therefore subject to a death rate proportionate to the size of the total population. I tuned it so a population of 10,000 would experience a death rate of 10% per generation, and a population of 20,000 would experience a death rate of 40% per generation.
I ran this model, starting with a population of 10,000, to test whether your conjecture was correct, that the population would go extinct. It did not go extinct. It grew, oscillated, then settled down at just over 12,100. 2% of the population had no mutations. Over 9% had one mutation, 29% had two and 60% had three. And this mixture was stable. This population could continue indefinitely, even while accumulating approximately one bad mutation per generation each.
A great series of posts, Hillstart.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#163016 Jan 25, 2014
I am going to post his on several threads for I want the opinion of many. How would science describe this accident of where a child gets ran over at not only at mid body but also at neck level and then bounces up as if nothing ever happened. Give your 'scientific explanation" of how this happened.

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#163017 Jan 25, 2014
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I love my 4/5 schedule. Didn't get any Sand Fleas (Mole Crabs) and therefore have no bait to fish for Pompano and here's why: They replenished the beach last year with sand from 100s of truck loads coming from inland quarries and the Lifeguard on duty said that is probably why their numbers are way down. I used to see them everywhere, especially at low tide right where the wave recedes. Now gone.
Anyway, the fossil order is not a problem. It's even better for a flood than for evolution. Most of the lower fossils are random evolution-wise but predictable flood-wise. You would predict that creatures on the bottom of the sea would be the first to be buried. Next, you expect to find fish and this is what you find. And by that same reasoning - it was a flood you know - the larger animals would have sought higher ground, so that is why the most able are found at the highest layers.
Going to see the Cleveland Orchestra tonight and leaving in half an hour. Gotta go...
Two of every kind of whale must have taken a lot of room on that boat--not to mention the extra food it took to keep them fed.
Level 6

Since: Aug 07

Miami, FL

#163018 Jan 25, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
A great series of posts, Hillstart.
You're an evolution cheerleader! LOL!

Rah rah rah! Go go go! Give me "E"! Give me a "V"! Give me a "O"!

Aaaaaaaaaah EVO! Yeahhhhhhhhhh!

:~D

“Don't get me started”

Level 1

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#163019 Jan 25, 2014
replaytime wrote:
I am going to post his on several threads for I want the opinion of many. How would science describe this accident of where a child gets ran over at not only at mid body but also at neck level and then bounces up as if nothing ever happened. Give your 'scientific explanation" of how this happened.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =0pm0GQijBEoXX
I'm going to guess that the mom took most of the force from the wheels. Watch carefully, she gets hit first and he's behind her. And when the kid finally ends up in front of her the front-right wheel was turned, so it went around his head instead of across his neck. But still, freaking awesome. Sad, it looks like the mom didn't make it.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#163020 Jan 25, 2014
appleboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going to guess that the mom took most of the force from the wheels. Watch carefully, she gets hit first and he's behind her. And when the kid finally ends up in front of her the front-right wheel was turned, so it went around his head instead of across his neck. But still, freaking awesome. Sad, it looks like the mom didn't make it.
Are you fkning blind?!?! The kid gets ran over at mid-body then again at neck level. So give your scientific explanation on how the kid just bounces back up like a boss as if nothing happened.

“It is what it is”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#163021 Jan 25, 2014
appleboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going to guess that the mom took most of the force from the wheels. Watch carefully, she gets hit first and he's behind her. And when the kid finally ends up in front of her the front-right wheel was turned, so it went around his head instead of across his neck. But still, freaking awesome. Sad, it looks like the mom didn't make it.
And btw it was his grandma and they both made it.

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) 25 min Into The Night 81,760
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Science 33,046
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 5 hr Science 164,277
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... Thu Eagle 12 - 2,191
Did humans come from Sturgeons? Oct 16 Science 1
Proof humans come from Tennessee Oct 16 Science 1
Science News (Sep '13) Oct 14 Science 4,005
More from around the web