Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

As Zsa Zsa Gobor got a mention how is it that Mr Miller carefully avoided explaining why the dear lady was reducible to the same sort of ridiculous explanation of the flagellum which he gave for those who have a powerful need to believe in it for reasons I have specified previously on numerous occasions?

There is no honest argument against evolution, But even in the face of indisputable and rock solid scientific evidence the doubters and nay sayers will not yield.
They will look at the video you posted and it just wont register.
Two diametrically opposed viewpoints.

The thread is not about evolution ecy. It is about the teaching of it to adolescents when it is obvious that it undermines the traditional beliefs of the communities many of them live in and are happy in and when it is of no use whatever in the economic roles most of them will come to occupy.

Unless you realise that the proposal to teach evolution to adolescents is a wedge designed to promote atheism your participation in this grown-up debate is futile.

There are probably quite a number of well accepted scientific theories which are not explained to adolescents. I won't suggest what they might be because I know the delicacies of the average anti-IDer's sensibilities.

Awe, comeon, spendi, spill the beans.

And to hell with the truth.

Tradition First, truth second.

Hi spendius I have studied alot of what you have said and I do find value in what you say but I do have a few questions that I would hope that you do not mind answering. If you mind answering please do not respond and I will not ask!

Thanks Reasoning Logic

Ask away rl.

Hi Spenius Thanks for your time. I have studied the bible more than I have studied any other subject and I found great value in what I have read!

I have used a strong's exhaused concordance studying greek and hebrew definitions. Not that it makes me any kind of expert but instead it only adds to my questioning of things.

I would like to say something and I hope that you will not take it as hateful as that is not how I intend it to be.

I find you defending religion but at the same time I see you acting as if you are anti Jesus in much of what you speak of. Please do not take my observations personally.

What do you think about this person's thoughts?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIINgQ1TooE

Oh really ? So you think everything to be explained has been explained ? There are no gaps ?

There you go , making invalid connections between what"Yankee" said and what you want to assert he said.
No reasonable person would deny that evolution is fact and is the foundational concept of modern biology. Are there several gaps? certainly, bt like any other theory, gaps exist but not of the kind that invalidate the theory.

Unless youre just looking to sort fly **** from pepper I am giving you credit for realizing this.

I watched the first episode rl. That tested my patience so I haven't seen the others. The guy is very vain.

What do you mean by your assertion that I'm anti-Jesus?

You're being side-tracked Io. Suppose, if only for argument's sake, that there is no argument against evolution thought of in isolation. Would that justify teaching it to adolescents?

I don't know that there is any argument against free market economics thought of theoretically. Or against full-blown eugenics.

There are a lot of concepts which are difficult to argue against if social consequences are ignored. Some very dangerous ones.

Evolution gets a hold on people precisely because of its simplicity and usefullness in avoiding complex social issues whilst posing in the armoured certainties of scientific principles. I don't recall any significant Western politician standing up for evolution. That's because they have to deal with complex social issues.

Only if the adolescents were learning the science of "biology" then its critical that they lwarn it. Is that too difficult to absorb?

spendi is the one the adolescents ought to get protection from.

ECY is looking and sounding very much like Farmerman. I assert he said "There is no honest argument against evolution". What do you think he said ?

Gravity is a fact.....its exact nature is a theory and open for discussion. Life is a fact....its exact nature eg evolution, is a theory and open for discussion. I have said before I think Evolution Theory is accurate but it ceratinly is NOT a fact. There is a difference between a fact and a factual theory.

If I hold a book at arms length and let go, it will fall. That is a fact. Whether or not a Theory of Gravity is factual is open to interpretation but it most certainly is not a fact.

I thought you would know the difference ?

As usual this clown contributes nothing but barking at heels.

I did not say the theory of evolution was fact, I said there was no honest argument against it and I stand by that.

It is. Explain why it is "critical" for 50 million adolescents as opposed to the few people who are going to get their living, or excuses for certain rejections of Christian morality, from a study of evolution.

Explain why D.J.Aidley never mentions the matter in his book The Physiology of Excitable Cells which is way beyond your expertise fm and by a very great distance.

No, Farmerman said it was fact.
Then we had better do this by the numbers. At what stage of life did evolution start ?