Should evolution be taught in high school?

Feb 24, 2008 Full story: www.scientificblogging.com 176,162

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." Full Story

“Just the facts maam”

Since: Mar 09

Earth

#127898 Apr 23, 2013
Evolution should be taught in high school if we want to educate our children in sound, scientific principles and provide those that move on a solid basis for advanced education.

A rather silly question all in all.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#127899 Apr 23, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
And no predicted evolutionary ancestors of modern bats but thousands of modern looking bat fossils. This is the case with ALL organisms. When are you going to realize that there never was ANY macroevolution? How many fossils do we need? A billion that look just like the modern equivelent with zero fossils of predicted evolutionary ancestors? I mean, what's it going to take to convince you?
Predicted? How the fook can someone predict evolution? How the hell can someone attempt to build a consensus for evolutional survival across species with different environmental requirements. You want to compare apples and pears that’s fine but don’t expect any rational thinking persons to curl up and agree with you.

Where the hell have you picked up this “predict evolution” terminology? Certainly not a scientific source, so we have to surmise that it’s from creation.com or one of the other BS goddidit sites that don’t want to know anything about anything if it’s not already “predicted” in a book compiled from tales and mythology by committee 2000 years ago and again 400 years ago.

When are you going to realise that macro-evolution and micro evolution are different stages in the same process. Just because evolution shows your goddidit ideas to be a crock does not mean it will go away when you deny it, it juts means that it shows your goddidit ideas to be a crock.

Predicted again? HOW… please advise how the future of a species is predicted? I eagerly await you reply on this.

Cro magnon convinced me, all the other evidence from various sources (palaeontology, biology, morphology, genetic etc) confirmed my conviction. Now some moron such as yourself who has no evidence, no facts, contradictory and hearsay information and who relies on nothing but faith for his “factual diet” is not going to change those facts.

Note the latest (todays) news on evolution: The gonorrhea virus is rapidly evolving, with each new antibiotic the virus evolves to counteract it. The current strain of virus is evolving to build resistance to modern antibiotics. Big problem here, there are no new antibiotics and none under development therefore the incidence of gonorrhea is on the increase

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#127900 Apr 23, 2013
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>You may perceive that as a lie but I don't, I have no need or reason to lie, give me a reason to lie. I'm just saying I have a comprehensive understanding of the Hebrew scriptures. The movie "Desperately seeking Susan" was about what happened 30 years ago when God called me.
I perceive it as a contradiction, a total opposite in statements, therefore a lie.

I.E.
“not making any claims”
“My thoughts and beliefs are engraved in stone”

Either one was true and one was not or they were both untrue, because logically they can not have both been true.

You cannot “not make any claims while making claims.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#127901 Apr 23, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>So now you're insulting me behind my back on other threads. That's not much of a surprise considering what a stupid, cowardly, fkg liar you are.
Nope I insult you to your face and you know this and deserve it.

The discussion was with ANOTHER hypocritical poster who ran to your aid when I highlighted to YOU your obvious personality and mental defects. Soon afterwards the hypocritical moron cites exactly the same argument I made to YOU in his comments about another poster.

However perhaps we need to ad paranoia to the list of problems you suffer.

Please note, I have no god to lie for and so have no need to lie

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#127902 Apr 23, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Unlike Christine's blatant hostility.
Hey butt brian, I was not the one one writing

“what a stupid, cowardly, fkg liar you are.”

That’s pretty blatant hostility in anyone’s book

This of course simply highlights your own hypocrisy, well done

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#127903 Apr 23, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I know there aren't any predicted common ancestors of bats in the fossil record.
I know the fossil record of bats is abundant with over 1,000 specimens, but even with all that, there is nothing to show the formation of a bat's wing membrane over time or the slow elongation of the fingers and that all - yes, everyone of them ever found so far - are fully developed, capable of flying and looking similar to bats today. The oldest bat fossil in Jura Museum in Germany "dated" (notice the quotation marks) some 50 MYA could have been from today's bats.
This is just facts with no opinion. Now here's my interpretation of these facts, i.e., my humble opinion: Macroevolution never happened.
I want to explore the fossil record. I have discussed bats and invertebrates and fish. What about Sea Lions? Flying Reptiles? Dinosaurs? Whales? Birds? Plants? Isn't the story about all of these the same as with bats and fish?
What is wrong with examining the evidence? Does this bother you?
I suggest you look up the meaning of the word predicted

I also suggest you look up the meaning of the word similar

Who cares about your humble opinion, scientific evidence shows that opinion to be simply that, opinion. Note that opinions are like butt holes, we all have one, scientific facts are a completely different matter.

No you don’t want to explore the fossil record, you want to deny it, you want to find loopholes and you want to ignore the evidence. Why, because you don’t understand evolution and you really have no intention of trying to understand evolution. Fact, different species evolve at different rates, one (but not every) factor that drives this evolution is the environment they inhabit.

Honey, I have examined the evidence that interests me, Cro-Magnon man, we have been here before and you of course denied and tried (and failed) to ridicule my knowledge and you have searched (and failed ) for loopholes in that knowledge. Now like a true creationist you have run out of argument so you go back to the beginning and start all over again.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#127904 Apr 23, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Son of man, because Tyre has said concerning Jerusalem,‘Aha, the gateway of the peoples is broken; it has [a]opened to me. I shall be filled, now that she is laid waste,’ 3 therefore thus says the Lord [b]God,‘Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring up many nations against you, as the sea brings up its waves. 4 They will destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers; and I will scrape her debris from her and make her a bare rock. 5 She will be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea, for I have spoken,’ declares the Lord God,‘and she will become spoil for the nations. 6 Also her daughters who are [c]on the mainland will be slain by the sword, and they will know that I am the Lord.’”
7 For thus says the Lord God,“Behold, I will bring upon Tyre from the north Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon,
And the next several verses talk about
Nebuchadnezzar
Nebuchadnezzar
Nebuchadnezzar
Nebuchadnezzar
and Nebuchadnezzar.
"She will be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea..."

Doesn't sound like the mainland now, does it?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#127905 Apr 23, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
Creationists concept of evolution:
http://designtaxi.com/news/357117/Animals-Pho...
Awesome!

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#127906 Apr 23, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
But if bats evolved as you claim, wouldn't you think there would be at least one or two example of their common ancestor in the fossil record by now? After finding thousands of bat fossils and they are all similar to today's bats and nothing else? Don't you see the issue here? Or would you rather avoid it? Do you think anyone will ever find the evidence? Are you saying all the bat ancestors failed to fossilize for some reason? Or do you think bats just formed suddenly out of nothing? By the way, this same line of reasoning goes with invertebrates, fish, trilobites, sea lions, birds, reptiles, dinosaurs, etc.
This is the third time you have offered an answer to this post, can we surmise that you are worried?

First let get this straight, because there are no answers to a particular question does not mean the question is invalid so goddidit. It simply means that the answers have not yet (if ever they will be) found. As it happens some answers have been found, see the work of Dr. Gregg Gunnell at the University of Michigan Museum of Paleontology, particularly his work on Onychonycteris. However I guess you are simply going to ignore this “transitional” fossil (or invent loopholes).

To fossilise in any number bones need mass and particular environmental conditions, The majority of species that ever lived on this earth did not leave fossils, bats are tiny and soft boned so leave little evidence of their passing. The fact that there are very few “common ancestor” fossils for bats is no surprise.

There is the theory that bats evolved rapidly in the Eocene (between Onychonycteris and the modern bat is only about 2 million years)

Jeesus fooking christ on a crutch, you deny and make up all sorts of garbage for Cro-Magnon fossils when there is copious evidence. Lets see how vehemently you deny Onychonycteris

Yes we know that some animals have not evolved much, we also know that some animals have shown considerable evolution. Some are currently being observes evolving. Your point is what?

Since: Aug 07

Arlington, VA

#127907 Apr 23, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the third time you have offered an answer to this post, can we surmise that you are worried?
First let get this straight, because there are no answers to a particular question does not mean the question is invalid so goddidit. It simply means that the answers have not yet (if ever they will be) found. As it happens some answers have been found, see the work of Dr. Gregg Gunnell at the University of Michigan Museum of Paleontology, particularly his work on Onychonycteris. However I guess you are simply going to ignore this “transitional” fossil (or invent loopholes).
To fossilise in any number bones need mass and particular environmental conditions, The majority of species that ever lived on this earth did not leave fossils, bats are tiny and soft boned so leave little evidence of their passing. The fact that there are very few “common ancestor” fossils for bats is no surprise.
There is the theory that bats evolved rapidly in the Eocene (between Onychonycteris and the modern bat is only about 2 million years)
Jeesus fooking christ on a crutch, you deny and make up all sorts of garbage for Cro-Magnon fossils when there is copious evidence. Lets see how vehemently you deny Onychonycteris
Yes we know that some animals have not evolved much, we also know that some animals have shown considerable evolution. Some are currently being observes evolving. Your point is what?
Onychonycteris isn't transitional! And there are plenty of soft tissue and other fossils softer than bats. Give it up already.

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#127908 Apr 23, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Onychonycteris isn't transitional! And there are plenty of soft tissue and other fossils softer than bats. Give it up already.
Really? Be specific. Why isn't it transitional. What are these other soft tissue fossils that you speak of?

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#127909 Apr 23, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Onychonycteris isn't transitional! And there are plenty of soft tissue and other fossils softer than bats. Give it up already.
Every living creature is "transitional", just like every color on the color wheel is "transitional from "red" to "green".... even "blue".

http://www.practical-decorating-ideas.com/ima...

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#127910 Apr 23, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
"Many nations is mentioned in Ezekiel 26:3
Right in the opening verses of the prophesy
When is Nebuchadnezzar first mentioned?
Oh dear
Much later on in Ezekiel 26:7
It seems that Nebuchadnezzar was a SUBSET of many nations
Tsk tsk...
You're wrong

If you can't see the fallacy in what you just wrote you are beyond hope.

Since ID comes after evolution it is a subset of evolution.

Now can you see the fallacy?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#127911 Apr 23, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
What is your reference supposed to tell me?
I see no refutation in that abstract

There is no refutation in that paper, nor did I say there would be. I just added it to the end because it was related.

As I have already refuted your ideas about HLA-DRB and everything else in your post I did not feel up to doing it again.

You just repeat the same nonsense over and over no matter what gets said.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#127912 Apr 23, 2013
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
I actually do
Hence I run rings around you, Dogem

Well, I do see you running around in circles.

If you read science hows comes you don't seem to understands any science?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#127914 Apr 23, 2013
Urban Cowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Onychonycteris isn't transitional! And there are plenty of soft tissue and other fossils softer than bats. Give it up already.

Onychonycteris is a transitional. There has not yet been an exhaustive examination of bat evolution. Give it up already.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#127915 Apr 23, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Be specific. Why isn't it transitional. What are these other soft tissue fossils that you speak of?

Because he does not want it to be a transitional, because he has asserted that there are no transitionals, because in his opinion his religion requires it.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#127916 Apr 23, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Every living creature is "transitional", just like every color on the color wheel is "transitional from "red" to "green".... even "blue".
http://www.practical-decorating-ideas.com/ima...
That's something you may want to chant when standing on your head in your favourite yoga position

Very soothing....
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#127917 Apr 23, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Because he does not want it to be a transitional, because he has asserted that there are no transitionals, because in his opinion his religion requires it.
Dogem
You and I have been through this before, haven't we?
Where you conveniently ignored the latter part of your own Wiki reference

Remember?
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#127918 Apr 23, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I do see you running around in circles.
If you read science hows comes you don't seem to understands any science?
Hmmm...

What a deep......not really.....question

Lemme think about this.....

OK

I do understand science

Not everything

But certainly more than you do

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
Special Feature: A few interesting facts about ... 1 hr glasspilot 4
Expert: We must act fast on warming (Sep '08) 4 hr Brian_G 27,952
Why Japan has bet its revival on humanoid robots 7 hr SHlTWORMDAEGUDEBD... 15
How to Recover Deleted Files from Recycle Bin o... (Mar '12) 17 hr Lacus215 15
TAG Heuer enlists partners in smartwatch plan a... 20 hr Theprime 1
The Wire: CIA on defensive; Cuban hip-hop op; H... 23 hr WE JUST DONT CARE 50
Feature Points duplication glitch Tue YoureALiar 3
More from around the web