Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

@Leadfoot,

That would go under social science.

@cicerone imposter,

Ahh... You know, those scientists, they all look alike..

@brianjakub,

Quote:

Darwin did not understand the system well enough (biochemistry and DNA) nor complex information management (information technology) to comment beyond wild speculation from an education level that, today would probably be considered middle to high school level.

I think Ill just let you lie there in comfortable ignorance about Darwin.

Its more fun listening to you pontificate and use phrases that have absolutely no rational meaning in context.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

I've had the opportunity to meet several scientists during my many travels. Bob Brodsky was a rocket scientist who taught Astronautics at USC and Iowa State University. When I met him, he lived in Southern CA, with his wife Patti. He designed the aerodynamics on the atomic bombs I worked with during my four years in the Air Force in the late 1950's. Others were PhD's who were professors at universities. Richard Pimentel taught Life Sciences at Cal Poly for some 40 years. I met him on an African safari in South Africa. He invited me to join him the following year on another African safari, so I did. I have met and made many friends around the world. Francisco Baez lives in Mexico City. He's the editor of the English newspaper in Mexico. Alexander Ogilvie lives in Loreto, Mexico. He's orginally from Vancouver, but now has dual citizenship. Alexander and I have traveled all over Europe, South America, and Asia together because my wife hates to travel. Alan Smith is a Civil Engineer who managed the city water/sewer system in Manchester, England. Cesar lives in Havana, Cuba. He works at Nacional Hotel in Havana. I also know Hiroshi Robaina. He owns one of the largest tobacco farms in Cuba. His father. Carlos, owns a restaurant in Havana. I also have friends in Singapore; Bill and Yvonne Lim. I have two friends in Moscow, Russia, Sergei and Oleg. Sorry, I'm rambling on.....

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

My grandparents were southern baptists and Methodists. So I was shown a very traditional view of Christianity, one which still dominates the south even today.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I read the statement about Darwin not understanding dna in your post. We still don’t understand it well enough to replicate anything. Some people understand well enough to say it “could have” happened this way. But that is just an educated guess that could be wrong. With no replication it could be another way.

2 Replies

@brianjakub,

Im not sure where you get thi feeling of hopelss ignorance. We know plenty about DNA and can even create it "new" using xsting means of our planets "bucket chemistry". For example the bases QA and G are purines made from formamide, a natural compound that is formed daily on earth by reacting methane (formed in the earth by the "Tropsch Process " )and reacted with NITROGEN (which makes up most of our atmosphere .
DNA is easire to make, of course, from yeast but we do know how to act like nature and we understand it pretty well. NYT science once said we can create it from scratch but thats not entirely true because the pyrimidine side i a bit trickier.

No need to default to godidit until you exhaust what we really do know and do in chemistry. Theres a whole branch of geochemistry that looks at how many fearful sounding compounds are created in the earths own "labs"

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

The point about Darwin not understanding genetic is a fact of history since Gregory Mendel dint propose the science of genetics until several. years after Darwin wrote Ed 1. Darwin, in Ed 6 he ,in passing, admits to the responses of (namelless") germ structures that may resolve his problem of decay in traits via generations. It was a mere 2 line reference to newest work that may or may not even have been referring to Mendelian genetics.

They overlapped.
To say it was something that would be taught in a HS survey course may be true, but almost all knowledge is like that int it?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

NYT science once said we can create it from scratch but that is not entirely true. . .

We can create what from scratch? Chocolate chip Cookies? Maybe a protein shake? Surely they weren’t talking about creating life or replicating creating complex life from simple life.

No need to default to intelligence can’t be involved. I don’t want to default to anything. All possibilities and all combinations should be considered.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

To say it was taught in a HS survey course may be true, but almost all knowledge is like that isn’t it.

Not ID. Some misguided judge decided that by himself for the whole country.

What is the quote from Darwin you are so fond of?

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Your knowledge of the history of science education in the US has apparently been acquired from the Discovery Institute or the Tennessee legislature.

I dont think I aid anything about "Quotes from Darwin". My comments were focused mostly on how your understandings of how natural selection was derived and developed by Darwin through observation, experimentation and comparison.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

Quote:

My grandparents were southern baptists and Methodists. So I was shown a very traditional view of Christianity, one which still dominates the south even today.

Sure it does. And if that 'it’s my way or be tortured in Hell' is taught in any or all of them, they are lying about what is in their founding documents, and are therefore false religions. It would be a mistake to tie those falsehoods to whether an intelligent creator exists or not.

Meant to ask, did your grandparents not believe that God was beyond matter and time as you said?
I’ve never heard a mainstream believer assert anything other than that God was omnipotent. That means pretty much unlimited by those things.

0 Replies

@brianjakub,

Quote:

We can create what from scratch? Chocolate chip Cookies?

" breathless obtusity". We can , in the lab, duplicate what happes on the plant. we can create AGTC from simple chemicals in the lab and weve found that the planet can duplicate same. Weve seen , (Ive said it before but you try to deny its significance), that formamide and GA, and T and C can be seen in the spectra of certain class tar and planets thousands and millions of light years away. (It would be neat if we found similar chmical in star spectra from 13 BILLION years no? Why are you so quick to dismiss all these facts?? Oh yeh, the god thing.

0 Replies

@brianjakub,

Quote:

Surely they weren’t talking about creating life or replicating creating complex life from simple life.

they were. "THEY" (cientists)are working in parallel to evolutionary research to come up with some hypotheses of the foundation of life.This is what we colloquially refer to as the "Creation of life".

Whereas evolution is NOT a theory of origins.

1 Reply

Quote:

Whereas evolution is NOT a theory of origins.

That is true. But if abiogenesis by natural processes is not possible, it throws a completely different light on evolution.

If it is found that an intelligence had to have been involved in the genesis of life, Occam's Razor would suggest that it’s likely the same intelligence was involved in its progression on the planet.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Whereas evolution is NOT a theory of origins.

If you say so. That's why I said

Quote:

Surely they weren’t talking about creating life or replicating creating complex life from simple life

And you said

Quote:

"THEY" (cientists)are working in parallel to evolutionary research to come up with some hypotheses of the foundation of life.

And some radical scientists that are being peer reviewed out of mainstream science are trying to come up some hypothesis of the foundation of life, where ID is a part of a plausible hypothesis.

To bad there has to be a fight over whether the debate should be happening at all in the scientific community. The fight should be over ideas not whether or not we should have the debate.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

That is true. But if abiogenesis by natural processes is not possible, it throws a completely different light on evolution.

If it is found that an intelligence had to have been involved in the genesis of life, Occam's Razor would suggest that it’s likely the same intelligence was involved in its progression on the planet.

That is a very good point using Occam's Razor.

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

It also nicely fills every 'gap' in evolution.

Scientists who come up with theories that fill a lot of gaps in other fields (like Mr. Higgs) are usually awarded Nobel prizes, but in this field they are mocked for proposing the 'God of the gaps'.

The world is a funny place.

0 Replies

@brianjakub,

Quote:

And some radical scientists that are being peer reviewed out of mainstream science are trying to come up some hypothesis of the foundation of life, where ID is a part of a plausible hypothesis.

do these scientist follow some religious leaning or are they part of some govt that denies or denied the existence of evolution (like hangers on in Russian "biology's Lysenkoist BS"). Its kind of funny that someone would propose something as "per reviewed" even before they get going on their "research" Could you share the projects of which you speak??

Could be youve made this up too. ??

Quote:

Surely they weren’t talking about creating life or replicating creating complex life from simple life

No they are doing lotsa things. Is making prebiotic chemical (like DNA) from Ammonia (present in atmosphere), Carbon monoxide(present in black smokrs and volcanic xudates) and Phosphoric acid (present in volcanic stuff)
and Mwthane (created by tropsch process before life arose)

BTW, you mentioned that teaching evolution was decreed by some judge, how was that happening?? any idea??

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

well stop your fuckin "IF, IF" **** and get to work. Youre not impressin me with your lazy ass preaching the gospel according to Dobby. Many of us have asked you guys " where this evidence has come from and what is it , when' it gonna get here??"
And all you seem to spout is "Its obvious" (BJ) and "IF ITS TRUE" (you).

You ought to be aware that only Christian SCience establishes "truth" sans fact

1 Reply

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know