Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

I hope your "Scientific researches(sic)" include a Glossary of terms with which you can develop a working vocabulary. So far youve beenkind of a dud.

Well ci. My Post: # 4,585,941 seems to have been beyond your reach and I was trying to keep it simple for obvious reasons.

It's a question of trying to articulate the transition we are in. The sociological equivalent of the periodic table of the elements so to speak but a bit more puzzling.

The News from around the world suggests we are going backwards but with these things one never knows.

How is you short selling of gold going?

That's a dud fm.

spendi, I'm not going on a hunting trip; all you have to do is provide a direct link to your post. Are you just an asshole, or is that your whole personality?

It's on the previous page and posted at 3.47 am your time today. A breakfast treat for you.

You're attitude to this whole topic is 100% emotional and 0% scientific. Which is like Mrs Whitehouse's campaign being the result of her asexual appearance. Had she looked like Raquel Welch she would have been bang at it as they all are who have the appropriate credentials.

While we are on the topic of transition and sociology I thought that this may be something that Farmerman, Cicerone imposter, Plainoldme and Spendius may find value in.

I do think that Spendius may have to be honest with himself on this one but I do think that it may be possible because I have seen him do it before!

Please disprove anything that is incorrect!

http://www.youtube.com/user/Neanderthalcouzin?feature=uploademail_ch

So, when I say you don't know what you're talking about, it's emotional? LOL

It's more like petty for an Englishman who's knowledge about evolution is even confusing to yourself.

The surprise is that they draw so many conclusions from such scant evidence....a clear case of wishing to fill in the gaps regardless .

Very few areas of science are totally dependant on evolution theory....having said that, of course it should be taught in schools .

I can't usually sit and watch tripe like that for long rl. But I did this time, the last time, just for you. Trying to have empathy with what you are thinking.

The coal is no use to anybody until science comes along. Our science. The Christian version. The coal has been there for millions of years. So has the oil. And if the coal belongs to anybody it is a much the abororiginal Indians as Mr Waspie. His "we" is a claim to fame I'm not convinced is justified. He's a mob orator working your emotions. A gig.

Sociology is the scientific study of contemporary human society. It seeks to understand society and provide solutions to society's problems. What solution did that idiot offer? That we should all do the impossible and become catatonic. That he has the answers to society's problems with his Goebellian diatribe.

Having empathy with everybody produces inaction surely? Such a thing is unheard of in evolution. The New Testament is about empathy. He is just paying lip service to emotionally charged utopian ideals which have no chance of ever becoming operative. Not with 308 million Americans and 500 million Europeans all voting for growth. If he's wedded to "empathy", which he isn't, he should empathise with those voters and what they vote for. Asking us to imagine we are Chinese as as ridiculous as you asking me to imagine I'm Islamic.

Our efforts to relieve suffering in the world's disasters are enormous and such things are unheard of before our era. And they involve us in sacrifice and the use of the expertise of doctors and nurses and builders and the equipment and food and medical supplies. No strutting up and down a stage picking out a few selected photographs in a cosy campus setting close to a luxury hotel and the ready means to get to it.

Was there actually an audience? Was the clapping at the beginning and the end out of a can. The absence of booing or even any coughing or any sight of the audience is suspicious.



Will you give me an example of where you think I have not been honest on "another one". I have dealt with your sneaky smears of that type earlier but you don't seem to have had much empathy with what I said. Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

The Chinese would lock the silly sod up. Or shoot him. So would the Iraqis before we set out to rescue them from their hopeless position at great cost.

Chris Anderson, the current curator of TED, has 3 daughters. How much oil do you think they will consume in the 90 years of their lives? Did your "change the world" nincompoop calculate that before he did the business? Are you up for restricting those young ladies in any way? If not forget it. Allow yourself to empathise with them. As a luxury liver yourself that should be easy enough.

What else could it be? There's no science involved.

How? Provide us with the logistics Io. Recommendations are useless without the procedures to bring them into being.

BAck to the topic somehwat.
Using evolution as the central concept in modern biology, what would you consider to be the "top ten" ideas in organic evolution?.

I think that one of the first would have to be THE COMPLEX CELL. until the complex cell, with all the "centrole" features and plasms of its kin , all life was floating around with only a cell wall and some basic slosh in the center. The complex cell is like a tootsie pop while the primitive cell is like a scrambled egg.

Suppose rl, and this is a more reasonable supposition than supposing one is Chinese or Islamic by a very long way, that there had been questions from the "audience" at the end and your weaver of the winds had been asked whether a social order such as the US or Europe could survive a reversal of the trend to higher consumption patterns.

What do you think his answer would have been given that such a reversal would put the Dow into freefall and create mass unemployment and the severe reduction of pensions and other forms of unearned income and that those results would require an authoritarian and repressive government to manage.

How much detail do you want ? Lesson plans ?

It should be taught as a separate subject tying in with the sciences that have well proven findings on it . There are some gaps and doubts, and these should be taught to....they may very well inspire our next scientist to explore in these areas...who knows what we will find (by we I mean them) .

What wonderful stuff for the kids fm? That is ideal as a preparation for a scientific future now that science has exhausted its possibilities. The kids could think of themselves as a meringue: sugar and spice and all things nice sort of thing. A day in the life of Joe Egg. The title of a Joe Orton play.

Actually, the first idea is a scientific society if we are to avoid the infinite regress absurdity. Only with that, and it is Christian to its roots, can we even contemplate the matter and have the words and techniques to give it expression and employ it as a psuedo-justification for setting aside the orderly management of certain natural carnal gratifications. The disorderly management of them by legislation being the only other alternative if general promiscuity is to be avoided which it is difficult to see why an evolutionist would seek such a non-natural behaviour.

Second, some nice teachers from New England colleges of tuition for young ladies of the better sort.

Some coloured up visual aids showing things like scrota, vulvatic receptacles, the swallowing mechanism and its corollory.

Book publishing arrangements which are capable of responding to swings in the opinion polls causing 5-4 votes on school boards to cyclically take turns with 4-5 votes depending on which way the economic winds are blowing.

Making sure that organic evolution is not presented in such a way as to cause outraged parents to burn the schools down. MOR organic evolution.

Putting over the idea that if A fucks B and gets C and that C is different from A and B to a greater or lesser extent and if C has longer legs that A and B, some residual gene from a few generations back, C can run faster, assuming the long legs are normal long legs, and not be at the back of a running herd when the lions catch up with it and thus more likely to have opportunities to breed in the future and thus promote the genetic material of A and B and itself into D, E, F, G etc producing a long-legged race and the extinction of lions if they don't adopt a similar process to counteract the evolutionary advantage of long-leggedism.

Then, putting over the idea that if a species is extant it can only be because it has found some accomodation with the process above.

Proceeding from that to the notion that current estimates of the number of extant species is between 5 and 30 million and that it is a scientific fact that they all made such an accomodation with what they eat and with what they are eaten by.

Then an analysis can be made of these accomodations to see if there are any constant factors which might be said to be a reading of the mind of God or, as you prefer, the fundamental nature of THE COMPLEX CELL.

10--Get the Bible out to see what the wisest we have produced have read of the mind of God, and the antidote to its anti-intellectualism, and you get a class of Jesus freaks.

It's easy.

Go talk to those who think Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead. They are more in your line. You'll fing some at meeting houses. This is an international debate forum. You take what you get on here.

But Jesus didn't do the reproductive caress presumably on the grounds that it wasn't fair to drop some innocent unborn into that **** he was living in with all these ******* Romans and quisling toffs running things. Which, of course, forecasts our own extinction, as many heretics have fervently wished for, and still do.

But such a contradiction had not envisaged theologians. The original sociologists, whose attitude to Galileo was based on science and not on some evil madness as some of you like to suppose as a logical premiss.

There's an ever present danger of the ego over-rating its own logical premiss. Even extending to actually believing it is a logical premiss not subject to peer-review.

I want all the important detail which is necessary to bring about the outcome you wished for. The logistics. Lesson plans are a small part of that.

Not continuing to wish for such an outcome would save you all the trouble but if you do continue to express such a wish you will either be faced with the same question again or will have to restrict your expressions to those circles where they don't know their arse from their elbow. A2K is not such a circle.

It says on Google, or it did once, that A2K is a "prestigious" American debate site.

What is this topic about again? It's hard to tell most of the time.

Whatever your opinion about a2k, you sure do spend a lot of time here - which indicates you have very high respect for this site.

Quit talking trash; it makes you look more foolish than your own posts.

Not with the last posts it isn't.

It's an obvious challenge to the teaching of evolution to ask how it is to be done and why it is to be done. Without such a challenge there is only special pleading for some economic or emotional good snowed over with only a light powdering of finger-twisting sophistries taking place in an abstracted netherworld located in the noddle of the sophist. Even the what is to be done is open to quite a wide range of choice.

In fact it is a challenge to evolution theory that it offers no explanation of how or why the process takes place at all at any biological level.

It is no surprise, with such scientific ignorance being habituated in sophists, that the "schools" and the "students" and "teachers" become items in the abstracted netherworld mentioned earlier and thus easily lend themselves to idealisation and uniformity, that teaching equates with learning, and the limits of wit become fixed at the level of ros's latest great heave of disemburdenment of pent up frustration.