Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

@brianjakub,

brianjakub wrote:

Do you think there is a way to question evolution, or introduce the possibility of a designer without being religious?

I can think of at least one; a Philosophical challenge. It would go something like this, "All of reality is an illusion and we as humans are not capable of knowing or understanding what we currently call Reality".

However, there are no groups of philosophers out there nagging the court system to force this type of caveat into public school science classes. If there were it would sound like this, "Yes students, Biological Evolution is Descent with Modification. But bear in mind that human beings aren't capable of discerning reality, so therefor Biological Evolution should be taken with a grain of salt". Think about how ridiculous that sounds, and recognize how very very similar it really is to the theological argument.

But the important point is that even though there will forever be modifications to the details of evolutionary theory, there will never be a scientific challenge to the core principle of Biological Evolution (Descent with Modification). Even if some intelligence is tweaking the process at minute quantum levels it is still resulting in Descent with Modification. We can see this in the morphology and genetic structure of everything around us. It's scientifically proven; it's done. This is the process that is happening, and if it's being guided at a level which is so minute that it cannot be differentiated from a natural process, then we come full circle back to the philosophical argument and it all peters out into ridiculousness again.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Quote brianjakub on the pyramids:

Quote:

If men could replicate it today, we wouldn't have to assume.

Yes, we can. But it would be expensive. The price of labor has gone up surprisingly in the last 4,500 years.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Quote:

The only groups pushing for "alternate" ideas are religious groups and their "alternate" ideas are all deceptively packaged religion.

I can't speak for them but my own objection to how Evolution is sometimes taught is when it ventures into the realm of religion itself. Some teachers of Evolution take it one step further and explicitly say or imply that to think evolution does not explain everything is willful ignorance.

It is that factor which I and some others object to, not a desire to push 'alternative' theories.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

There is a ton of circumstantial evidence supporting the pyramids being built by men. From tool marks on the stones to the fact that people are buried inside them.

It's called "evidence". It exists to show that men designed and built the pyramids. We don't have to know every detail to come to the obvious conclusion because what details we do have all point to one thing.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot wrote:

I can't speak for them but my own objection to how Evolution is sometimes taught is when it ventures into the realm of religion itself.

I would object to that as well, because it's not a religion and teaching it in that way would be a waste of time.

Leadfoot wrote:

Some teachers of Evolution take it one step further and explicitly say or imply that to think evolution does not explain everything is willful ignorance.

I've never experienced this first hand nor have I read any credible record of it happening. In order to respond to it I would have to hear the exact quote so that I could understand what the teacher was talking about.

Leadfoot wrote:

It is that factor which I and some others object to, not a desire to push 'alternative' theories.

Yes, I would object to an overly simplified generalized statement like that as well. Clearly evolution doesn't explain everything. It doesn't explain nucleosynthesis in stars for example.

Again, I would need an accurate example of an actual statement in context in order to respond to something like that.

0 Replies

@brianjakub,

I wonder who he was making the notes about

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/pyramids_of_egypt/construction.php

Quote:

Herodotus reports mechanical lifting by short blocks of wood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramids

Quote:

The second historically documented Egyptian pyramid is attributed to the architect Imhotep, who planned what Egyptologists believe to be a tomb for the pharaoh Djoser. Imhotep is credited with being the first to conceive the notion of stacking mastabas on top of each other, creating an edifice composed of a number of "steps" that decreased in size towards its apex.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imhotep (really good references in here)

Quote:

If men could replicate it today,

it's possible

http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/build-pyramid-today.htm

Quote:

The Great Pyramid is also amazing from a materials standpoint. The pyramid measures 756 by 756 feet at the base and is 481 feet tall. It is made up of more than 2 million blocks weighing on the order of 3 tons each. To build it out of blocks, you would have to find a quarry containing that much stone, cut the stone out of the quarry, load it onto a truck or a train, haul it to the site, unload it, lift it and so on. Working with stone blocks is definitely going to be a major pain. It's certainly doable, but it's a pain nonetheless.

1 Reply

@Blickers,

Blickers wrote:

But it would be expensive. The price of labor has gone up surprisingly in the last 4,500 years.

Ah-hahahahahahahahaha . . .

I'm not sure your interlocutor will appreciate the ironic humor.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

He could have omitted a couple of digits, and it would have made more sense.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

There was a nifty program that Penn put on re: the "evolution" of ancient buildings. The pyramids demo'd an interesting history of "OOPS" from plain mastabas m through the "step pyramid" the two "bent pyramid" until reaching an idel angle of repose. Also, within each structure were actual drawings and carvings of how the damn things were developed (sort of ;like the first step in producing "as built" drawings.

You dont see much of those "ancient alien" douche bags any more. They were the TV clowns who claimed that almost everything humans built"had almost assuredly been influenced or assisted by ALIENS"

Often the stories behind the truth become even more interesting than those outrageous offerings

1 Reply

@farmerman,

The thing about the "ancient aliens" crap which is really offensive is that it assumes that our ancestors weren't bright enough to do these things on their own. But von Däniken made some good money out of that crap, so the race to publication was on. It was the same thing with the Roswell BS--in 1978, a physicist named Friedman interviewed the officer who accompanied the debris to Fort Worth (which was actually from a high altitude balloon, part of an Army Air Corps top secret project which they weren't going to discuss publicly). Then in 1980 someone wrote a book about the "Roswell" incident, made a good chunk of change, and the whole "ufology" scam was off and running. The authors had previously worked the "Philadelphia experiment" and "Bermuda Triangle" scams, but hadn't made nearly as much money. To their credit, the people of Roswell exploit the credulous to this day.

The Roswell UFO Festival

http://cdn.topsecretwriters.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/roswellfestival.jpg

http://d38zt8ehae1tnt.cloudfront.net/Ufo_Parking_Only__4077.jpg?v=1353506347

1 Reply

@Setanta,

von Daniken and his " understudies" have called themselve "Ancient Alien Theorists" as if they have enough bullshit "proof" to be able to raise their yarns to a level of theory.

I think the cable networks got tired of em because they cost more than the other reality crap thats on. What with all the trips to Puma Punku , the Nazca lines, and Thebes.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I suspect it also had a limited audience. In the land of the one eyed monster, ratings are king.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I know you think my POV is whack but I think you underestimate the number of truly delusional people out there.

my 3rd ex had many friends who shared her alien UFO beliefs and there are an amazing number of websites that push a quasi-religious scenario based on benevolent 'Galactic' beings who are soon to free earth from evil aliens and their earthly collaborators. The purveyors of this stuff all survive on donations and they do well enough to produce whacky movies, some of them quite polished in production if not content.

I wouldn't believe there were this many people that gullible if I hadn't seen it first hand.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

Quote:

Even if some intelligence is tweaking the process at minute quantum levels it is still resulting in descent with modification.

If this statement is true why would it have to be Supernatural? Why can't there be a natural scientific explanation for this intelligence. Can we come up with a natural explanation of why human beings can come up with new ideas like how to build a better building while Birds have to build the same nest every year? Can we prove innovative human thought originates in the brain or could it just manipulate the brain and originte elsewhere? Can we prove it either way? If it originates outside the mind and just manipulates the mind at minute Quantum levels, does that make human thought Supernatural and non-scientific?

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

You are moving out of the realm of Science and into Philosophy, and for that you need to talk to Fresco, he's more into that than I am.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

So unless we can prove matter creates intelligent thought we might not be able to talk about human thought in a scientific way? Does that mean philosophy is not a science? or is it that Super Natural Science rather than a natural science?

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Your Quote:
Can we come up with a natural explanation of why human beings can come up with new ideas like how to build a better building while Birds have to build the same nest every year? Can we prove innovative human thought originates in the brain or could it just manipulate the brain and originte elsewhere? Can we prove it either way?
.
I think when you talk about innovation or new ideas in the intelligence context, there is an evolutionary process here. Not just one person is responsible for creating this spectacular building. It involves a collective of many ideas from various people like most inventions which helps this building evolve...

1 Reply

@Amoh5,

Quote:

It involves a collective of many ideas from various people like most inventions which helps this building evolve...

Yeah, But Still does not explain why birds (or any other animal) do not build on the ideas and experiences of the ones that came before. Damn birds keep building the same thing for millions of years. Our 'ancestor' Apes keep doing the same stuff too. We went from caves to Skyscrapers and NYC in a mere 10 thousand years. What's up with that?

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

your concept of applied time an length of the genus Homo seems to be in line with your Creationist worldview. Caves to skyscrapers in 10 K years eh?
Are you actually gungasnake with just another stage name?

2 Replies

@farmerman,

I was referring to the time when Homo first started building dwellings until today, not when Homo was said to emerge.

Your ability to decipher English is in need of something, I'm not sure what.

1 Reply

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know