Should evolution be taught in high sc...

Should evolution be taught in high school?

There are 179258 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.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95709 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
Science thinks they may have confirmed the existence of the Higgs Boson, but why are they calling it the "God Particle"? Fine with me, because this is an extreme example of intelligent design and fine tuning.
http://creation.com/higgs-boson-god-particle
It's something of a joke. Leon Lederman - who coined the name - originally wanted to call it the 'goddamn particle'. His publisher made him change it.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95710 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know how they got there but I gave you several reasonable possibilities and this is not as big an issue as you seem to think.
As usual, when Urb has been shown to have proposed something that is completely ridiculous, suddenly it becomes a non-issue.

He's consistent, I'll give him that.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95711 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you already checked every molecule on the Asian continent for Koala content? Really?
Are you really going to defend your nonsensical koala hypothesis on a criticism of a sarcastic remark? Really?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95712 Jul 9, 2012
Psychology wrote:
Lowell guy and Dogen sittin in a tree, k I s s I n g, first comes love, then comes marriage, then comes little Dogen in a baby carriage.:)
Tell us when you're ready to prove you understand psychology.
What are you? 12?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#95713 Jul 9, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
It confirms the big bang and a 13.7 year old universe among other things.
Fine tuning is a delusion in the mind of the desperate.
The Higg's boson doesn't really confirm the Big Bang. It *does* confirm the standard model for particle physics, however. With that, the three non-gravitational forces are described by the same fundamental theory.

Whether there is 'fine tuning' or not depends on whether the Standard model is final or whether supersymmetry is confirmed. In the latter case (which is where many of the bets are), dark matter is easily described (least massive supersymmetric particle) and fine tuning aspects go away.

This is one of the typical problems with fine tuning arguments: what appears to be fine tuning in one theory is a prediction of other theories. Especially at the edge of knowledge, the fine tuning argument is risky: it is too easy for a minor change in our understanding to make the whole issue go away.

This is one thing (of the many) that Creationists tend not to understand about science.

Since: Aug 07

United States

#95714 Jul 9, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
As usual, when Urb has been shown to have proposed something that is completely ridiculous, suddenly it becomes a non-issue.
He's consistent, I'll give him that.
That was just one of several possibilities. So tell me, is the notion of rabbits being introduced by ship to Australia also completely ridiculous?
Mugwump

UK

#95715 Jul 9, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
What are you? 12?
Am guessing jimbo - so 12 is about right for the mental age.
Mugwump

UK

#95716 Jul 9, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
As usual, when Urb has been shown to have proposed something that is completely ridiculous, suddenly it becomes a non-issue.
He's consistent, I'll give him that.
Strange isn't it

Living fossils = big problem (for Evo)
Total implausibility of post flood dispersal = minor issue (for YEC)

Consistent ?, methinks not

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95717 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
That was just one of several possibilities.
Oh sure. Possible just like flying saucers transported them.
Urban Cowboy wrote:
So tell me, is the notion of rabbits being introduced by ship to Australia also completely ridiculous?
Leave the goal posts where they are, John Boy. We're talking about koalas not bunnies.

Since: Aug 07

United States

#95718 Jul 9, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh sure. Possible just like flying saucers transported them.
<quoted text>
Leave the goal posts where they are, John Boy. We're talking about koalas not bunnies.
Exactly the same situation.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95719 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly the same situation.
Blatant lie. Rabbits exist all over the world. Koalas do not. Or hadn't you caught on to that fact?
Mugwump

UK

#95720 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly the same situation.
Except we have evidence of
A) the rabbits existing elsewhere prior
B) a historical record of them being introduced
C) a plausible reason for such an event

But otherwise you are spot on - exactly the same situation

Since: Aug 07

United States

#95721 Jul 9, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Blatant lie. Rabbits exist all over the world. Koalas do not. Or hadn't you caught on to that fact?
You're wrong.

Since: Aug 07

United States

#95722 Jul 9, 2012
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Except we have evidence of
A) the rabbits existing elsewhere prior
B) a historical record of them being introduced
C) a plausible reason for such an event
But otherwise you are spot on - exactly the same situation
And quite a complete explanation I might add. From creation to the Ark to Australia. No problem. Koalas have always been Koalas. They were intelligently designed and created from the beginning. You, on the other hand, are at a complete loss as to the Koala's evolution. Isn't that right?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95723 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong.
Oh really? Then please tell me where else the kolas are indigenous besides eastern and southern Australia. I await your nonsensical reply.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#95724 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
And quite a complete explanation I might add. From creation to the Ark to Australia. No problem. Koalas have always been Koalas. They were intelligently designed and created from the beginning. You, on the other hand, are at a complete loss as to the Koala's evolution. Isn't that right?
Goal
posts
moving
again

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#95725 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
That was just one of several possibilities. So tell me, is the notion of rabbits being introduced by ship to Australia also completely ridiculous?
1: You didn't just say it was a possibility; you said it was the MOST LIKELY EXPLANATION.

2: We KNOW rabbits were brought to Australia, but we also know that all the rabbits everywhere in the world weren't rounded up and deposited on Australia, with the evidence of rabbits existing anywhere other than Australia being systematically eliminated. Your story requires the latter. Rabbits on Australia doesn't.

3: You posit explanations, and once the absurdity of the explanations is impossible to deny, you claim it isn't significant. It sure seemed significant when you decided one of them was the most likely. I didn't know we determined the likelihood of things that are insignificant. By the way, how DID you determine that "fur traders" was the most reasonable/likely explanation for why koalas are only found on Australia? When you make shit up, we're not just going to pretend you didn't, or pretend it doesn't matter. It matters. People who make shit up are known as liars. If you're doing something other than making shit up, then demonstrate it. Show us your evidence. Show us your reasoning. Show us your work. Or, you can just admit that you were making shit up and that you're a liar.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#95726 Jul 9, 2012
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh really? Then please tell me where else the kolas are indigenous besides eastern and southern Australia. I await your nonsensical reply.
Asia, of course, but the fur traders rounded up EVERY SINGLE KOALA ON THE ENTIRE CONTINENT, along with every bit of evidence of their existence anywhere other than Australia, and dropped them off Down Under. That's the REASONABLE and MOST LIKELY explanation.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#95727 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
And quite a complete explanation I might add. From creation to the Ark to Australia. No problem. Koalas have always been Koalas. They were intelligently designed and created from the beginning. You, on the other hand, are at a complete loss as to the Koala's evolution. Isn't that right?
If you ignore all the evidence we have for the rabbits on Australia, and the complete lack of evidence supporting your story, they're the same situation.

Remind us...how did "fur traders" come to be the most reasonable and likely explanation for koalas appearing only on Australia?

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#95728 Jul 9, 2012
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong.
Do rabbits ONLY exist on Australia? If not, then it's NOT the exact same situation.

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
Is Time An Illusion? (May '10) 27 min SoE 9,743
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 1 hr thetruth 8,083
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr thetruth 27,279
News Sky-high Wi-Fi: Canada's airlines roll out more... 3 hr ethical eh 1
News Prosecutor charges man who shot at George Zimme... (Jun '15) Sat Melanie 2
News The latest in gadgets: Making apps and robots t... Fri Local 5
News Connecticut marks 30 years since Challenger dis... Fri American Gentlema... 3
More from around the web