Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 180300 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

#94670 Jun 19, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Who cares?
In demonstrating the ability to defend his inconsistent views ?

Not you obviously

Don't worry, we can move on to your next piece of inconsistent nonsense - you have obviously conceeded this point
Mugwump

UK

#94671 Jun 19, 2012
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
When you're prepared
to acknowledge the sheer absurdity of this proposition, we can talk. Until then, it's mockery.
Good luck with that, I've noticed that when UC gets presented with clear cut arguments against his lunacy he either

Gets all pissy
Ignores the post
Changes the subject

Followed some weeks/months later by him bringing up the same drivel again, often in the form of his '99 reasons why creationists refuse the evaluate any opposing argument' nonsense.

Not sure if this points to a weakness in creation science or a lack of UC's ability to argue it.

Both probably

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#94672 Jun 19, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The other mammals assumed that pouches were used for stealing and wouldn't have a bar of them.
Thus Marsupials were the first Australian convicts.
That is also why we can't find Noah's ark. After the waters receded, the other mammals chipped in and chartered the Ark so they could send all the marsupial convicts Downunder. The Ark actually rotted in Darling Harbour.
*Splooch!*

Thanks.

Coffee all over my keyboard.

I am holding you responsible

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#94673 Jun 19, 2012
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Needs no commentary
Double Fine sees that you are from Manchester.

Red or Blue side?

If you are Blue, Double Fine has only pity for you.

If Red, then Double Fine has one thing to say to you:
Glory, Glory Man United!
Mugwump

UK

#94674 Jun 19, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
Double Fine sees that you are from Manchester.
Red or Blue side?
If you are Blue, Double Fine has only pity for you.
If Red, then Double Fine has one thing to say to you:
Glory, Glory Man United!
Actually noticed that - think my iPhone was having a blonde moment - Leeds, which isn't enough distance from mancland to be a united supporter

Not huge footy fan tbh - but rated the madchester music scene in the 90s - you twisting my melon man !!!!

That last reference will confuse our friends over the pond

:-)

Since: Aug 07

United States

#94675 Jun 19, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Using the highest directional shift ever found, six degrees in a day we can even use your bonkers sites to disprove their own notions.
If the MAXIMUM rate ever found is assumed to occur every DAY during the flood, you can account for 12 magnetic reversals during the entire flood (180/6 = 30 days each).
I take it that you, like most creationists, believe that the whole geologic column from the Cambrian to nearly the present is the result of the flood.
The mid Jurassic period forward is one fifth of that column.
Since that time (whether you think it represents 100 million years, or just under three months!) there have been at least 170 reversals. These 170 reversals all had to occur in the last 1/5th of the flood period, but lets say 3 months.
That is approximately 2 reversals per DAY. And since we know there are periods between the reversals significantly longer than the reversals themselves, they would have has to have flipped their 180 degrees in a few MINUTES, twice a day.
Now, tell me how a MAXIMUM find of six degrees in a day can be used as evidence that a 360 degree flip-flop could occur in a day...every day, in fact, during the flood period? Even using the totally unrealistic assumptions you want us to believe, that would be 360/12 = 30 degrees per HOUR, which is 30 times faster than the fastest motion ever measured. Looking as the sea floor reversals, most of the time no reversal is happening, so so are really saying 300 or more times faster.
And remember, that measured motion was INSIDE one of the reversals you claim was happening 30-300 times faster.
Even on your own terms, magnetic reversals cannot support a 1-year flood geology.
The reversals are your concern, not mine. They have already been shown to occur rapidly with no effect on the overall geomagnetic field strength in the long term so doesn't hurt my position at all. Other scientists have documented this as well. Also, they are easily explainable in terms of a year long worldwide cataclysmic flood. So reversals are not really the issue. Perhaps a minor distraction.

It's the profoundly important decreasing geomagnetic field strength that's the primary issue. This is very good evidence of a young earth. Also of young planets. We have been measuring and recorded it for 100 years with great precision so based on uniformatarian principles precludes any possibility of evolution doesn't it? The continually decreasing geomagnetic field strength appears to testify very well to a young earth creation!

Since: Aug 07

United States

#94676 Jun 19, 2012
Dear Prudence, open up your eyes

Dear Prudence, see the sunny skies

The wind is low, the birds will sing

That you are part of everything

Dear Prudence, won't you open your eyes?

-John Lennon

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#94677 Jun 19, 2012
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually noticed that - think my iPhone was having a blonde moment - Leeds, which isn't enough distance from mancland to be a united supporter
Not huge footy fan tbh - but rated the madchester music scene in the 90s - you twisting my melon man !!!!
That last reference will confuse our friends over the pond
:-)
I too, am from across the pond, but South. Very much South. Secret tip: 36-27

Secret tip #2: Kevin Pietersen

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#94678 Jun 19, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The reversals are your concern, not mine. They have already been shown to occur rapidly with no effect on the overall geomagnetic field strength in the long term so doesn't hurt my position at all. Other scientists have documented this as well. Also, they are easily explainable in terms of a year long worldwide cataclysmic flood. So reversals are not really the issue. Perhaps a minor distraction.
It's the profoundly important decreasing geomagnetic field strength that's the primary issue. This is very good evidence of a young earth. Also of young planets. We have been measuring and recorded it for 100 years with great precision so based on uniformatarian principles precludes any possibility of evolution doesn't it? The continually decreasing geomagnetic field strength appears to testify very well to a young earth creation!
I ask again:

What evidence have you got to assume a linear distribution? Linear distributions for ANYTHING is extremely rare in nature.
Mugwump

UK

#94679 Jun 19, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Dear Prudence, open up your eyes
Dear Prudence, see the sunny skies
The wind is low, the birds will sing
That you are part of everything
Dear Prudence, won't you open your eyes?
-John Lennon
Still preferred the sioxse and the banshees version :-)

And that Liverpool - Manchester was happy Monday's , stone roses , Inspiral carpets (could be wrong but think a lot of drugs motivated the music scene back then )

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#94680 Jun 19, 2012
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Still preferred the sioxse and the banshees version :-)
And that Liverpool - Manchester was happy Monday's , stone roses , Inspiral carpets (could be wrong but think a lot of drugs motivated the music scene back then )
Liverpool *shakes head*

What in the hell are they doing over there? They are running a legendary club into the ground!

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#94681 Jun 19, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The airheaded loadmouth Philly heckler is back I see...
Yep. Just to irritate you.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#94682 Jun 19, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
The Coelacanth (Latimeria chalumnae) was previously known only by fossils presumed by evolutionists to have first evolved 400 millions year ago and to have been extinct for 65 mya. But in 1938 one was caught and we now know they swim today.
The evolutionists explain that they are still alive today because they were so well adapted to their environment that there was no "selection pressure"? Now one has to realize that this environment includeds their food/prey they eat and also the predators that eat them which both are supposedly also "evolving"!
They eat a wide variety of species in the benthic region so food would not be much of a problem even if it changed. Sharks are their main predators. They haven't changed much over time either.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
How utterly ridiculous the notion that everything all around them evolved all along while these Coelacanths experienced no change in hundreds of millions of years! What a stupid theory. Evolution never happened.
The fact that you state that "Coelacanths expreienced no change in hundred of millions of years" demonstrates your ignorance, your dishonesty or both.(I'll go with the latter) The ancient Coelacanths are not even the same species as the modern one, you loud-mouth south Florida hick.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Damn what's wrong with you people.
We have brains and don't swallow every thing Rev. Billy Bob says without question.

Find that land-bridge yet?

Since: Aug 07

Burke, VA

#94683 Jun 19, 2012
MikeF wrote:
The ancient Coelacanths are not even the same species as the modern one, you loud-mouth south Florida hick.
2010 Census has FL at almost 18.8 million with PA at only 12.7. So most likely, it's the person from the lessor-populated state - PA- who's the "hick".

http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/index....

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#94684 Jun 19, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
2010 Census has FL at almost 18.8 million with PA at only 12.7. So most likely, it's the person from the lessor-populated state - PA- who's the "hick".
http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/index....
Typical example of you lack of any kind of logic.

Your lack of a reply to the point I raised is your admission that you were wrong. Again!

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#94685 Jun 19, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
The reversals are your concern, not mine. They have already been shown to occur rapidly with no effect on the overall geomagnetic field strength in the long term so doesn't hurt my position at all. Other scientists have documented this as well. Also, they are easily explainable in terms of a year long worldwide cataclysmic flood. So reversals are not really the issue. Perhaps a minor distraction.
It's the profoundly important decreasing geomagnetic field strength that's the primary issue. This is very good evidence of a young earth. Also of young planets. We have been measuring and recorded it for 100 years with great precision so based on uniformatarian principles precludes any possibility of evolution doesn't it? The continually decreasing geomagnetic field strength appears to testify very well to a young earth creation!
No, it is your concern.

UC, there are hundreds of reversals, and NO data shows its possible for this to occur in a year.

Even calculations based on your own side's misrepresentation, with every assumption skewed in your favour as I did, using the maximum rate ever discovered of 6% in a day and applying it for the whole flood year, FAILS to meet YEC requirements....so you just wish the problem away, and call it "my concern".

About now you scramble around, trying to remember all those "scientific creation" papers that sounded SO convincing when that was all you were reading. They do not stack up. None of your BS does, ever, when examined properly.

A declining field now, in itself, might be consistent with either YEC or old earth hypotheses. But the reversals are only consistent with an old earth, and you cannot make them fit a YEC scenario. NO data supports it. The only thing you have is a completely unsubstantiated idea that maybe the magma was thousands of times better at conducting at some point...with no possible mechanism for how that could happen.

YEC = a joke played on scientific illiterates.

Why? Because there are those among you (Sanford was one), who thought society "can't handle the truth" and would disintegrate without biblical fables to keep everyone in line. No wonder they, and you want to corrupt all real science understanding in the population.

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#94686 Jun 19, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Dear Prudence, open up your eyes
Dear Prudence, see the sunny skies
The wind is low, the birds will sing
That you are part of everything
Dear Prudence, won't you open your eyes?
-John Lennon
Imagine there's no heaven

-John Lennon

Since: Aug 07

Burke, VA

#94687 Jun 19, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Typical example of you lack of any kind of logic.
Your lack of a reply to the point I raised is your admission that you were wrong. Again!
You made no points. All you did is heckle from the sidelines like a moron. That's all you're capable of.

Since: Aug 07

Burke, VA

#94688 Jun 19, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Imagine there's no heaven
-John Lennon
Wost song ever written. I think even he regretted it later on. The last interviews revealed he was quite conservative after all and in spite of the picture liberals paint of him.

“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#94689 Jun 19, 2012
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Imagine there's no heaven
-John Lennon
Great song.

But here is the best version of 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.

Science / Technology Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr Regolith Based Li... 93,406
News Crystal meth, gay men and sex - a 'perfect storm' 4 hr NE Jade 3
Is Time An Illusion? (May '10) Sun SOE 15,933
News Education minister, chair have concerns about H... Sun closed info loop 2
News The unspoken factor in Amazon's search for a ne... Apr 21 Myer 2
News Halton Catholic students stage walkouts to prot... Apr 21 Good on em 1
News Cookeville man's child porn conviction upheld Apr 20 Ellen_DeGeneres 6