Should evolution be taught in schools?

Where did I say that?

I believe in the protection of individuals rights... if someones beliefs infringe on another individuals rights then I believe they should be stopped.

Racist schools would fall into this category....

statistically the majority of population subscribe to being christian....

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Should evolution be taught in schools?

I wish you'd say what they are.

Darwin:

And to date, noones come up with one.

Fine, but some faith schools promote discrimination against homosexuals and women (in some cases).

Close them?

There's a difference in subscribing to being Christian and actually being religious.

Exactly.

Topical: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/30/ashoura.children.ap/index.html

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Should evolution be taught in schools?

I'm not disputing microevolution, I asked you a simple question before:

Take the Cambrian explosion of animal life, 530 million years ago, some 50 phyla appeared suddenly in the fossil record. Only 30 to 34 survived. The rest perished. Since then no new phyla have evolved... why would no new phyla evolve?

i believe they should be censored if they are found to be doing this... a faith school must follow the law of the land.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Should evolution be taught in schools?

Gerald Schroeders website perchance? I've not studied the period in detail, but selective pressures and predation from existing phyla? Incomplete fossil record? Decreased mutagenic stimuli?

All perfectly plausible, and, crucially, better than the alternative: 'it woz god wot did it'.

Here's a slightly more informed rebuttal of this ignorant creationists opinions: http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/dec97.html

Ha ha, and here's another site that really rips him and his books to shreds http://www.talkreason.org/articles/reply_to_Schroeder.cfm

You need to read this Joe, it will set you straight on a number of issues - not least the 6 day creation story. For fucks sake, he's a physicist and doesn't know the difference between mass and weight! I distinctly remember my physics teaching telling me this in year 8! The number of elementary errors highlighted by a real physicist make such a mockery of Schroeder that he is simply not a credible source of information, interpretation or conclusions. It's well written, and a good use of 20 minutes of your time: http://www.talkreason.org/articles/schroeder.cfm#six

this is a very bold assertion. what evidence do you base this on?And where do you get the idea that there are no genetic mutations?

This is just ignorance. Mutations occur naturally all the time they can be seen in the present day human population quite commonly. We share something like 80% of our genes with plants. Every time a mutation occurs and has a selective advantage it will prosper. Every niche which is not filled will tend to become occupied by a mutated variation. This happens over hundreds of millions of generations a tiny bit at a time. The common ancestor of us all is a simple single celled organism, neither plant nor animal. Sometimes a simple genetic mutation can trigger larger changes in an organism which can speed up the process but the word mutation does not mean some sort of zombie creature appears. Most mutations are not advantagous so will not create a new variation that works but given the time spans available many do.

Can I show you one example of this happening? well most of the unique species of the galapagos are examples as darwin noted. In humans one gene variation can give you spina bifida but protects against malaria. That's an example of a mutation which confirs both advantage and disadvantage so it has not become established throughout the whole human population , only those areas where malaria is prevalent.
Marsupials only existing in Australia is another. Babies born with two hearts or sheep with 5 legs happen from time to time. It's not rare , it's common.
Given enough time it is easy to get from bacteria to venus fly trap or from bacteria to humans.
nobody has ever tried to demonstrate a direct link from venus fly trap to human.

As for the absence of new Phyla since pre cambrian times you have to ask why so many appeared then.
After the mass extinctions which occured before that period there were many large gaps to be exploited by organisms, which led to an explosion of successful variations. Since they were occupied by different phyla those large gaps ceased to exist. The possible SUCCESSFUL phyla now exist, therefore there are no new SUCCESSFUL ones occuring.

And you keep saying evolution is taught as FACT in schools when several people have said that it is taught as the THEORY of evolution.

Where did I say this? I clearly stated that to support the vast variety of life forms on this planet would need to be in a constant state of genetic mutation....

Which suggests theres a commonality amongst life structures... Any suggestion that this is an indication of our evolution from primodial soup is nothing short of blind faith.

Bollocks only those mutations that can be passed to the cells of offspring can "prosper", in humans germline mutations are good example of this, we have catalogued thousands of genetic mutations which had a negative effect on humans (the most researched life form to date) - yet we haven't found one mutation that has had a positive effect on mankind.... Where are you drawing the conclusion that a succesful mutation will propser?

No Darwin documented microevolution, macroevolution would be the explanation of how mammals and dinosaurs appear in the fossil record at around the same time or the explanation of bacteria and algae appearing in the fossil record immidiatly after liquid is formed on our planet... macroevolution is not demonstrated on the Galapagos

Gene variation is not the same as genetic mutation?!?!?

Only an idiot would suggest that we share identical genes.

That contradicts the theory of evolution... Your stating that once a strain of phyla is successful it stops evolving?!?!?!?

Darwin would turn in his grave

morning fellas.... whats going on here then?

can't we all live together, in peace and harmony? in a spiritual sense - we're all right because we know our minds. isn't that enough?

just live and let live





except gypos.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Should evolution be taught in schools?

You're starting to sound like a creationist.

Decreased mutagenic stimuli - This isn't a scientific answer, its a wild guess, there has been no evidence to base this conclusion on.

Incomplete fossil record - This seems to be the evolutionists answer to everything... "we know that this occured, we just haven't found any evidence to prove it yet"

predation from existing phyla - That doesn't explain why evolution stopped.... it merely explains why some may of perished (although its probably the least plausible explanation for the deceased phyla)

Keep digging scienceboy

You clearly haven't read any of his books.. typical of you though eh andy? drawing conclusions based on your own guess work without examining the evidence....

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Should evolution be taught in schools?

If I see that a person is alive, it is reasonable to conclude that they have been born. I have not witnessed their birth, however, therefore I can't tell you if they were born, I don't know, normally or by C-section, but I think it rational to believe it happened. It is not rational to assume that they spontaneously came into existence.

All the above were perfectly possible reasons why the observation you note (and as the link shows, the accuracy of it is very dubious indeed) could be perfectly compatibile with the overall theory: evolution. You think the evidence isn't there, well, go on then, what's the alternative? G-d whizzed down from his cloud again at this particular point to fix this event, careful to make it look like exactly something that could have arisen for any number of rational reasons instead? Aye, righto

I have no intention of reading Schroeders books. He doesn't know the difference between mass and weight!

This would have failed any GCSE physics student.

On page 38 of his 3rd book

This would have failed any A level student.

And his misunderstandings of relativity would fail any undergraduate physics student.

This man has PhD in physics!!! (admittedly an american one). Look what creationism has done to him! He's the laughing stock of the scientific world!

Only a fool, therefore, would take him at face value when he starts talking biology - if he's ignorant about the stuff he's studied formally, christ knows what errors he'll come out with talking about some other aspect of science

Back to the main subject: which alternatives to evolution do you want teaching Joe? Judaism? Islam? [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster"]Flying Spaghetti Monster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Richard_Dawkins_(2009).jpg" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/24/Richard_Dawkins_%282009%29.jpg/184px-Richard_Dawkins_%282009%29.jpg"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/2/24/Richard_Dawkins_%282009%29.jpg/184px-Richard_Dawkins_%282009%29.jpg[/ame]? Any of the other 5200 gods?

This is (mostly) bollocks, and requires a read of a basic evolution book (have I mentioned Blind Watchmaker?)

There are documented examples of creatures that have been much the same for 10's of 1000's of years - it's very likely that bacteria we see today are similar to those from millions of years ago, and they're far more 'evolved' than we are - this is exactly what one would expect in a constant environment over a relatively short time span.

The majority of mutations are not disadvantageous, they are neither disadvantgeous nor advantageous. Only a minority are beneficial, but then we are talking 5 billion years of earth here, not 6 days

Are you happy to have it taught as fact that the world is 5 billion years old, or might evangelical amercicans and their bible have a point?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Should evolution be taught in schools?

we're not discussing the birth of something though andy?!?!?!?

You're discussing something you think may of been born with no evidence to support this notion!

Who mentions G-d?!?!? This is a scientific discussion, you're beginning to appear desperate

I don't know who nicked my sandwich at work yesterday, but I'm not blaming G-d.... I don't need an alternative to doubt your theory!

I can demonstrate countless occassions where he clearly knows the difference, he was a member of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission a professor in nuclear physics at MIT... are you seriously suggesting he doesn't know the difference between mass and weight?!?!?!?

poor effort andy, poor effort.

Andy how do you think they should teach the origins of thermodynamics at school?

No school would teach this as they don't know! Just because I don't know the answers doesn't mean I have to provide an alternative... I'm suggesting that evolution should not be taught in the style it is currently taught... It's too inconclusive.