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.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#102948 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Thus demonstrating what I said earlier. That when energy is applied to a system, the degree of randomness of the system moves toward the degree of randomness of the applied energy. When energy is applied in a manner more random than the system to which it is applied, the system's entropy increases. When a complex living cell is exposed to radiation, the entropy in the living cell increases. This general concept can be explained by the following formula:
dS = k ln W-energy/ W-system
..where dS is the change in Entropy; k = the Boltzmann constant; and W is the wahrscheinlichkeit or number of possible microstates of the energy and the system, respectively.
Or more simply,
dS = k ln We/Ws
This indicates that applying energy to a system will move the entropy of that system. Say the system in question is raw construction materials like nails, lumbar and such. If the We were a bomb, for example, the system's entropy would increase; if it were a construction crew, the system's entropy would decrease. That's what the formula shows.
Since all possible energy sources are far more random than the living cells to which it is being applied, these results represent the total collapse of all naturalistic methods for producing or even maintaining the information contained in DNA of living things.
There is still no such thing as "random energy." Every time you refer to "random energy," all we hear is this: http://youtu.be/D2t0yRG1pjQ .

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#102949 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Acutally, frogs and humans share the same Animalia Kingdom and Chordata Phylum.
Way to completely disregard the post you're responding to and think that you're somehow making a point. Did you tie your shoes all by yourself today? You sure did!

“Don't get me started”

Since: Jul 09

Minneapolis

#102950 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it's generations you jackwagon.
No. Different organisms use their energy for different functions. e. Coli uses most of its energy for reproduction; humans use most of their energy for maintaining a complex system of organs. It's not about generations, but about how energy is directed.

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#102951 Sep 21, 2012
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
There is still no such thing as "random energy." Every time you refer to "random energy," all we hear is this: http://youtu.be/D2t0yRG1pjQ .
I noticed that when faced with the vexatious prospect of being in the wrong, you tend to spiral downward like a turd into fantasy land.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#102952 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I noticed that when faced with the vexatious prospect of being in the wrong, you tend to spiral downward like a turd into fantasy land.
Ah! At the top of your game today, Urb.

Do the middle finger thing again. That one's really funny.
LowellGuy

United States

#102953 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I noticed that when faced with the vexatious prospect of being in the wrong, you tend to spiral downward like a turd into fantasy land.
Well, somebody put on his big boy pants today!

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#102954 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Thus demonstrating what I said earlier. That when energy is applied to a system, the degree of randomness of the system moves toward the degree of randomness of the applied energy. When energy is applied in a manner more random than the system to which it is applied, the system's entropy increases. When a complex living cell is exposed to radiation, the entropy in the living cell increases. This general concept can be explained by the following formula:
dS = k ln W-energy/ W-system
..where dS is the change in Entropy; k = the Boltzmann constant; and W is the wahrscheinlichkeit or number of possible microstates of the energy and the system, respectively.
Or more simply,
dS = k ln We/Ws
This indicates that applying energy to a system will move the entropy of that system. Say the system in question is raw construction materials like nails, lumbar and such. If the We were a bomb, for example, the system's entropy would increase; if it were a construction crew, the system's entropy would decrease. That's what the formula shows.
Since all possible energy sources are far more random than the living cells to which it is being applied, these results represent the total collapse of all naturalistic methods for producing or even maintaining the information contained in DNA of living things.

This is:

A. A dodge
B. Already refuted.
C. Missing of the main point of the post
D. All of the above.

Correct answer is 'D'.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#102955 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah right.

He was not asking if you agree. He was checking your understanding of what biology accepts.

“May you be at peace.”

Since: Nov 07

Mars

#102956 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I noticed that when faced with the vexatious prospect of being in the wrong, you tend to spiral downward like a turd into fantasy land.

Again, "random energy" is the name of a model, not talking about something that has actual physical existence.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#102957 Sep 21, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
But I, as all these great scientists, Louis Pasteur, Issac Newton, Carolus Linnaeus, James CLerk Maxwell, Gregor Mendell, and many others, beleived in (the way you put it) "bronze age goat herder" stories, right? Probably 90% of all the important scientific discoveries of all time were all by scientists who were believers, isn't that right?
So what?

90% of all native indigenous populations were wiped out by you "christian" believers as well.

Neither "fact" is relevant to the complete and utter FAILURE of "creation science" to produce a single scientific discovery or technological benefit to humanity, despite 2000+ years to do so.

Heck, here is just ONE example of how "creation science" would benefit humanity if it were true that I just thought of in just the last 5 minutes: given the fact that you "fundamentalist christian creationists" continually assert that the human genome was FAR SUPERIOR in the past and allowed humans to live 900+ years, then "creation science" SHOULD be able to study the genome, see how it has changed (there are LOTS of human remains all the way back to 5300+ years ago to compare) and figure out what sorts of gene therapies which would allow modern humans to live long lives like the Biblical patriarchs.

Think of how much MONEY you "creation scientists" could make if you could promise wealthy patrons that they would be able to live to be 900 years old, just because you PROVED that the human genomes of people living 6000 years ago were MUCH BETTER (less "genomic entropy") than the ones they have now. If you could do that you would make Bill Gates look like a pauper.

Of course, EVERY genome study performed, including Otzi the 5300+ year old frozen mummy, show NO evidence that the human genome was significantly different from what it is now and would allow humans to live 900+ years.

Not that you "fundamentalist christian creationists" have ever allowed REAL scientific research and empirical evidence to ever interfere with your bronze age FAIRY TALE delusions.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#102958 Sep 21, 2012
Hey, Utter, here's another "creation science" benefit to humanity that is right out of your "science textbook": sprinkling the blood of a sacrificed dove on a lepers toes cures his leprosy.

Any of your "creation scientists" doing any state-of-the-art, cutting-edge research into this medical treatment?
Psychology

United States

#102959 Sep 21, 2012
Yea moron, tell the world that random energy has no physical existence, like a flash light beam shot into space or the backfire from a car.

Morons just gotta run their mouths, more than everyone else.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#102960 Sep 21, 2012
Hey, Utter, here's another one straight out of your "science" textbook": letting livestock copulate in front of painted sticks produces offspring with similar patterns on their coats.

Think how much money the Scots could save if they just let their cows and goats copulate in front of a tartan pattern. Slaughter the cow or goat, eat the meat, and simply wear the clan tartan with the pattern already "imprinted" on the leather or hide.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#102961 Sep 21, 2012
Psychology wrote:
Morons just gotta run their mouths, more than everyone else.
People reading your posts can see for themselves who the moron is.

BTW jim, you make that 10 BILLION dollars yet cleaning up cat pee?
Psychology

United States

#102962 Sep 21, 2012
It seems a second moron thinks random energy has no physical existence. Oh well, when one of the childish clique says anything, sooner or later, the rest just have to agree.
Psychology

United States

#102963 Sep 21, 2012
Didn't you morons claim that animals have feelings?

Have you morons never seen a cat or a dog, scratch itself!

Of course not, morons care nothing about their pets, that way they can treat them however.
Psychology

United States

#102964 Sep 21, 2012
About 1 to 2 years ago, I claimed animals were smart, just as I claimed bacteria was smart. The childish clique in its entirety, basically said I was an idiot for saying such.

Now they are agreeing that animals are smart and so are bacteria.

Childish cliques can only cut and paste, that's why Dogen acted like a cut and paste idiot, when he spoke of random energy.

Then another of the childish morons raced in, throwing childish name calling. It's what the childish cliques do. None of them can stand on their own two feet.
Psychology

United States

#102965 Sep 21, 2012
Ya gotta love how the American school system teaches these childish cliques. There is no where else for them to practice such.

Teachers are their role models. Do you know how and why?

Since: Aug 07

United States

#102966 Sep 21, 2012
MIDutch wrote:
<quoted text>
So what?
So if you agree that most of the greatest scientists of all time believed in what you call "bronze age goat herder" stories, wouldn't you want more regular people and certainly more scientists to belive in "bronze age goat herder stories"? I mean, if you like science and want to see progress that is.

Since: Aug 07

United States

#102967 Sep 21, 2012
MIDutch wrote:
Hey, Utter, here's another "creation science" benefit to humanity that is right out of your "science textbook": sprinkling the blood of a sacrificed dove on a lepers toes cures his leprosy.
Any of your "creation scientists" doing any state-of-the-art, cutting-edge research into this medical treatment?
THat is a complete ignorant misinterpretation.

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.

Biology Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
New Life Discovered that Lives Off Electricity Jan 16 Stephen 1
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) Jan 6 ChristineM 223,290
News Microbiologist: Mankind may be extinct within 1... (Jun '10) Dec 20 Jorge 63
News DNA Scan Uncovers 18 Genes Newly Associated Wit... (Mar '17) Dec '17 VACCINES CAUSE AU... 13
News How rattlesnakes got, and lost, their venom (Sep '16) Dec '17 was auch immer 2
News Rattlesnake Ancestor Was Venom Factory (Sep '16) Dec '17 was auch immer 2
News How our cells use mother's and father's genes (Sep '16) Dec '17 was auch immer 2
More from around the web