kallend 2,146 #126 November 12, 2004 QuoteQuoteThe following are just Theories!!! The earth revolves around the Sun. Continental Drift Electricity consisting of electrons Atoms National geographic has a current issue with a great story on it. Do you typically just pop in, throw zingers around, with nothing really intelligent of your own to add, and leave? I notice the attempt at insulting my intelligence. I’ll entertain your thought anyway. You can measure and show that the phenomenon you mentioned exists or occur. That is not the case with Evolution. You can, as Bill mentioned, show that animals adapt to their environments and some pass those adaptations to their offspring (i.e. Micro-evolution). You, however, cannot prove conclusively that there is connectivity amongst species or that there are regressive common links (i.e. Macro-evolution). It is a theory. There is absolutely no evidence to prove that species adapt to a point where they become a new species. Evolution does not need to be presented in its entirety as fact to children. It may be the basis of all we know now but it doesn't make all of it true. There are pieces to the puzzle that we probably will never have. I’m not saying that it doesn’t need to be presented. It does. Like I said, it’s the best information we have to date. However, it needs to be presented appropriately. How does "intelligent" design account for such things as: The human spine/pelvis that is poorly adapted to walking upright. The presence of the appendix that can and has killed millions over the millennia. Nipples on men. Teeth that decay when we eat food that we like. Patchy distribution of hair on humans. Joints that wear out before the rest of the body. A head that is marginal for passage through the birth canal. A reproductive system perfect for the spread of disease. An inclination towards promiscuity and adultery. One would think that an intelligent, omniscient and omnipotent designer would have taken care of these problems.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #127 November 12, 2004 I gave my appendix back to the creator back in '86 after he tried to kill me with it. Ever since then I stopped trusting him. Just kidding of course on the trust part as I'm not sure if Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and yes the Tooth Fairy exist with the creator who ... LOL ... created me in the image of himself (with his faulty appendix and all). Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #128 November 12, 2004 "Present-day ultra-Darwinism, which is so sure of itself, impresses incompletely informed biologists, misleads them, and inspires fallacious interpretations . . . Through use and abuse of hidden postulates, of bold, often ill-founded extrapolations, a pseudoscience has been created. It is taking root in the very heart of biology and is leading astray many biochemists and biologists, who sincerely believe that the accuracy of fundamental concepts has been demonstrated, which is not the case."—*Pierre P. de Grasse, The Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), p. 202 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #129 November 12, 2004 >You, however, cannot prove conclusively that there is connectivity amongst >species . . . You can certainly prove that! Our cells are identical down to a very, very low level with other mammals; there are a great many things that indicate there is a great amount of connectivity between species. We even share 99% of the same DNA with baboons. Obviously that 1% that's different is pretty significant, but the other 99% shows a very close link. >There is absolutely no evidence to prove that species adapt to a point > where they become a new species. It has happened frequently in recorded history. The following new species have arisen within the time we have been observing them: Mimulus guttatus (a flower; speciated when some flowers evolved resistance to a poison in the soil) Drosophila paulistorum (a fly; drifted naturally until two breeds could no longer interbreed and became separate species) Drosophila melanogaster (a fly; these were forced to speciate in lab tests) Rhagoletis pomonella (a fly) Nereis acuminata (a worm) >There are pieces to the puzzle that we probably will never have. I’m not > saying that it doesn’t need to be presented. It does. Like I said, it’s the > best information we have to date. However, it needs to be presented > appropriately. I agree there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #130 November 12, 2004 >Present-day ultra-Darwinism, which is so sure of itself, impresses >incompletely informed biologists . . . Are these the same biologists who foolishly believe that germs can evolve resistance to antibiotics? Next time you get an infection, be sure to refuse any drugs to treat MRSA or VRE - after all, they don't exist, and are illusions created by imcompletely informed doctors and biologists. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mardigrasbob 0 #131 November 12, 2004 Quoteimcompletely informed doctors It is called practice after all! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #132 November 15, 2004 QuoteThe following are just Theories!!! The earth revolves around the Sun. Continental Drift Electricity consisting of electrons Atoms National geographic has a current issue with a great story on it. Missed this one - Continental Drift was shot down a long time ago. Plate tectonics is the new kid on the block. The continents are not drifting but being driven. JumpScars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
craichead 0 #133 December 4, 2004 QuoteNot at all, just so long as quantum mechanics and relativity and kinetic theory of gases and continuum mechanics and thermodynamics had similar warning stickers. Shouldn't just pick on any one theory. Just thought I'd post more textbook disclaimer stickers created by an evolutionary biology professor at Swarthmore College...very amusing. http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/textbookdisclaimers/ _Pm__ "Scared of love, love and aeroplanes...falling out, I said takes no brains." -- Andy Partridge (XTC) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #134 December 4, 2004 QuoteQuoteNot at all, just so long as quantum mechanics and relativity and kinetic theory of gases and continuum mechanics and thermodynamics had similar warning stickers. Shouldn't just pick on any one theory. Just thought I'd post more textbook disclaimer stickers created by an evolutionary biology professor at Swarthmore College...very amusing. http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpurrin1/textbookdisclaimers/ _Pm Yup - gravity is JUST a theory. That's the truth.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeryde13 0 #135 December 4, 2004 school shouldn't teach any of these theories, they should teach kids how to use reasoning and logic to come up with their own beliefs. and my belief on this whole debate is..... both of them. life on this planet has evolved from elements including clay( i know clay isn't an element so don't even say it), to single cell lives, blah ,blah blah up tp animals. and over thousands of years animals adopt to survive in their envroment. and humans are evolving now. my dentist told me that their are bebies being born without wisdom teeth. the skull is getting bigger as our brains expand, and we are losing body hair as we depend on clothes to warm us. but, i see no way of the jump from apes tp men. i believe the soul and brain are missing and in no amount of time could be accounted for. so i do believe god is part of the evolution, our evolution in his image. and its not about reverends, allahs, budhas,popes or witch doctors. it's about the human race evolving to higher spirituallity . damn,............ i haven't jumped for about2 months now and i'm fiending or is it feending, feinding, fending, how the fuck do you spell that word.... i need to dive real soon... might fly down to arizona soon._________________________________________ people see me as a challenge to their balance Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #136 December 4, 2004 >but, i see no way of the jump from apes tp men. -------------------------------------------- Fossil May Show Ape-Man Ancestor Bones Found in Spain Are Called Landmark in Evolution By Guy Gugliotta Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, November 19, 2004; Page A12 Scientists have discovered the remains of a tree-climbing creature that lived 13 million years ago in what is now northeastern Spain and may be the last common ancestor of modern great apes and humans, according to a report published today. Scholars greeted the discovery as a spectacular find that brings together 83 skull fragments, vertebrae, wrist bones, ribs and other bones from the same animal, a rarity in a field that often bases its analyses on a few skull fragments and teeth. The fossil is also the oldest of a primate displaying traits shared by modern great apes, but not by monkeys: a broad, flat chest; shoulder blades fixed to the back rather than the sides; a spinal column suited to vertical climbing; a relatively flat face; and wrists that make it easy to grab and hold branches and tree trunks. In all, the remains represent a landmark addition to a fossil record that seeks to trace primate evolution from a 55 million-year-old lemur-like creature to the monkeys and great apes -- chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and human ancestors -- and finally to the appearance of modern humans only 100,000 years ago. -------------------------------------------------- >i believe the soul and brain are missing and in no amount >of time could be accounted for. You don't think apes have brains? They're a lot like ours, just smaller. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #137 December 5, 2004 theories are such a HUGE part of science... how can we teach science without teaching about theories???? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeryde13 0 #138 December 5, 2004 got me on a technicality there....your right , apes have brains. and i read that article about the tree monkey thing. i go more on intuition than "facts". i can read a hundred different articles and get a hundred different opinions. and not being a scientist myself, i can only judge what i believe to be the truth by my gut. and my gut tells my that god had a hand in evolution. now i'm not out to preach about it or have the schools teach my bullshit opinion to anyone. and further more know that i could be completely wrong. maybe the ralians are right and ufo's created us , or god did go poof and we apeared. don't know....and besides my quest for the truth, really don't care...... but i' glad how ever it happend....that it did happen._________________________________________ people see me as a challenge to their balance Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #139 December 5, 2004 good thing we dont let your 'gut' design aircraft or attempt open heart surgery... we'd be in alot of trouble... which is exactly why we should only teach real science in science class... the religion, philosophy and 'gut' feelings can be taught in social studies....____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeryde13 0 #140 December 5, 2004 huh? good thing your not a teacher ....because your interperative skills are a bit lacking. if you got a little lost in those two paragraphs i wrote you should just ask...we'll go line by line if we have to._________________________________________ people see me as a challenge to their balance Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #141 December 5, 2004 oh really shall we? Quotei can only judge what i believe to be the truth by my gut would you like a surgeon who refused accept science and anatomy and instead cut out what his 'gut' told him too?? how about an 'engineer' with no understanding of aerodynamics building and designing plane for you to jump out of based on what he felt 'looked right' ? belief, and gut feelings have their place, but your simply gambling if you trust your life to those who rely on them more than on proven, definable facts and the conclusions based on them... evolution is backed by all currently available evidence... creationism might make you feel better about your place in the universe, but it is a poor foundation to base anyone's education on...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeryde13 0 #142 December 5, 2004 bro, you took one sentence and ran with it. yes as far as the evolution theory i follow my gut. but how did you take that to belive i would apply that to something like being a doctor or airplane designer. i don't see how you made that jump. and you are basically right i wouldn't want a surgoen winging it with me on the table........ but, if i am dying on the table and hes tried everything the book says and it ain't working, i would hope he'd try his gut feeling and try something else to save me._________________________________________ people see me as a challenge to their balance Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeryde13 0 #143 December 5, 2004 your right my sweet nightingale, theories are a part of science and history for that matter. i think that they should be taught as theories and not as fact. but i believe that kids should be taught critical thinking to read and find all the theories on a given subject, and then make their own infomed conclusion. teach them how to learn insted of what to learn._________________________________________ people see me as a challenge to their balance Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #144 December 5, 2004 and that was my point.. We are educating our future surgeons, scientists and engineers. Why would we NOT teach them everything we currently understand about how life began in place of bronze age cultural myths?? Why would we possibly want to begin that education by equating one primitive culture's beliefs about the origins of life with the modern theories supported by all available scientific evidence? one of the things that the fundamentalists fail to understand (probably because they skipped science and went to prayer group instead ) is that the definition of 'theory' and how they are created and developed, is taught as part of the scientific method. Teaching them about the current ‘theory’ is an important part of their preparation for actual practice… there is no reason to include such a stupid disclaimer except that the fundamentalists are terribly afraid of the continuing decline of their influence over the progress and development of society. The more children who are learn critical thinking skills (created and developed by science and scientists) the more the church is sidelined as a means of social control, eventually becoming largely irrelevant to everyone except the fool and the fanatic____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #145 December 5, 2004 teaching someone how to learn should be the goal of schools. However, you can't teach them how to learn unless you give them something to learn. There's nothing wrong with trying to get students to intuit theories, that's part of critical thinking... however, you've got to give them the actual, current scientific theories once they're done intuiting, because they may be way off base. They're kids. If theories are being taught in science classes as facts, there is a serious problem with that science program, and I'd be lodging complaints with the district. Kids need to know the difference between a theory and a fact. Theories are not just fuzzy, uncertain ideas that are a step on the path towards becoming facts. A theory is not a fact, and a fact is not a theory. A fact is an observation, something that can be seen to be true or false with little or no interpretation. A theory is a conceptual framework that explains existing observations and predicts new ones. If you only teach kids facts, and not how to interpret those facts (theories), they only get half of the scientific process. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeryde13 0 #146 December 5, 2004 zen and night.... you know what i think is so cool, is that i agree with both of you. i'm no fundamentalist bible guy. i also can't deny evolution and wouldn't want to try . i am however ...the guy in the conversation that will try to stir shit up to get people s ideas flowing and to think out side the box a little. so it is ironic that we are heatedly conversating about shit and yet basically agreeing with eachother. just kind of using eachother to hone in on the truth or something..... anyway... saturday night and i gotta go like i said before....where ever we came from i'm glad we did._________________________________________ people see me as a challenge to their balance Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #147 December 5, 2004 >i think that they should be taught as theories and not as fact. If, by that, you mean "we should tell kids how science is done" I agree. If you mean "we should tell kids that gravity might not be real" (the theories of gravitation are just that, theories) then I'd have to disagree. >but i believe that kids should be taught critical thinking to read and > find all the theories on a given subject, and then make their own >infomed conclusion. teach them how to learn insted of what to learn. I would not want kids educated in a fact-free environment. It is not possible to reproduce all the science and math that led us to where we are; some things (like the Bohr model of the atom and its usefulness, the equations that govern kinematics, trigonometry) are best presented as science, not skipped over in a kind of "we'll let kids discover the arctangent on their own!" thing. Most kids can't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #148 December 5, 2004 Quoteyour right my sweet nightingale, theories are a part of science and history for that matter. i think that they should be taught as theories and not as fact. but i believe that kids should be taught critical thinking to read and find all the theories on a given subject, and then make their own infomed conclusion. teach them how to learn insted of what to learn. What is the difference, in your mind, between a theory and fact? How do you know something is a "fact"? What test do you use?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,593 #149 December 5, 2004 That site is excellent. Some of the links it has would be hilarious if they weren't so tragic. I think this one was my favourite QuoteSupport Science Education in Your Community by Donating Religious Materials to Local Schools Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,593 #150 December 5, 2004 Quotei go more on intuition than "facts". I think that pretty much sums up your argument.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
