What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 10:41 AM

The fact that evolution occurs has been well established; there is no debate about the fact of evolution. How evolution occurs is still being debated by evolutionary scientists.  They have always "acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred." That evolution occurs is FACT; how it occurs is proposed as theory (a structure of ideas that explain and interpret facts).

The POTUS announced that he wants Judeo-Christian creationism to be taught in science classes. His non-scientific brain cannot wrap around the idea that creationism is a matter of Judeo-Christian faith, not science. He doesn't understand that scientific facts and viewpoints are taught in science and religious faith and viewpoints are taught in religion classes. Or, he does understand this and wants to undermine the separation of science and faith (not unlike the Roman Catholic Church centuries ago).

The POTUS does damage when he confuses the masses by equating teaching faith with science. We don't need obfuscation when it comes to teaching science; we need rigorous scientific methods.

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 10:44 AM

Sgt. Bill Friday couldn't have said it better. "Just the facts Ma'am!"

OMG my next post is my 2,000th....I must think of something witty!

Edited by max 2005-08-05 10:44 AM

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 10:52 AM

No pressure, Max!

Dang, I just realized I must have hit 2000 this week. The hallmark moment came and went - I'll have to try to trace my steps...

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 10:57 AM

You are correct in a roundabout way. Yes.. Evolution does occur. Just look at genetic expression during intraspecies separation. The gene pool is closed off, and traits become more expressed, or the "bottleneck effect."
I come from a Judeo-Christian, protestant background, and while I do believe that my God COULD have created it all in the blink of an eye, I also believe in an intelligent creator who could have just started it and let it go as well. What Bush wants taught is Intelligent design. I am kind of against teaching that in school. Maybe a a sub chapter at most. It still falls back on an evolution premise, so maybe that could be included as a possible "theory" for the God fearing section.
Intelligent design is intriguing, but it is out to prove something. I received my degree and post grad in Molecular and Cellular Bio. I had an instructor say to the class one day that if you believed in evolution strictly or creation strictly, he could argue against and win in either case, so shut up, keep an open mind, and listen. I really appreciated that. Science goes about to provide a causal explanation. The Bible does not, hence the Bible is not a science text book.
This is touchy, as it seems are ALL issues nowadays. You just can't have differing opinions anymore. I mean, the NYT is trying to open sealed records in the supremem court nominees adoption of his two children!! I don't care if you are Rep. or Dem. Kids are off limits, especially ones that young with no control over anything. Everything is an issue and it is all out of hand. I think more people need to spend less time concerned with this stuff, get off their fat asses, and ride a bike. That's my 2 Cents,
-----
My life is a complicated drinking game.


"Master of Gentility" (in sarcasm, irony font) - kimj81

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 10:58 AM

As much as I agree with you, I did hear Dubya quoted as saying something like he thought people should know all sides. What? You mean we have... a CHOICE as to what we believe?!?! Noooo.....in this country?

As a reminder, this statement coming from someone I have in the past seen as very closed minded, and wanting nothing more than to impress that close mindedness on others. So...I'm trying (TRYING) to look at the bright side of things. Baby steps, right? Now if only we could get him to be open minded about abstinence only programs, seperation of church and state, abortion, stem cells, the Patriot Act, etc. etc. etc....

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 10:58 AM

Dude, I just realized it sounded like I was defending the Pres. What the...

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:00 AM

I say go ahead and teach creationism in school, just don't do it in a science class...because IT IS NOT SCIENCE. It's based on faith, and therefore can't be proven or disproven; the scientific method does not apply. If you want to talk about it, fine, but do it in a "Surveys of Religions" or even a philosophy-type class. Just don't pretend it's science
-----
Jim Christian
__________________________
Owner/operator Type B Multisport

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:08 AM



Too late...I used it up by giving out usefull information. Oh well, like age, it's just a number!

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:12 AM

The concept ofIntelligent Design, IMO, should be taught in Sunday School.  Evolution should be taught in public schools, which being subjected to Gov't regulation/interference, should be practicing the separation of Church and State.

Time is a mainmade invention - what we 'see' as millions or billions of years could be nothing more than a millisecond to God.  What we know of evolution, could just be God creating in His time-frame.  Ever make a sandwich for a hungry kid?  THEY will think it's taking forever, while YOU will think you're rushing!

-----
The run is just a victory lap for a successful swim and bike...

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:12 AM




Wow... this thread will for sure be hijacked! Lets keep it simple! I still fall back on everything being an issue. Some people vote on taxes, some on abortion, some on strict party lines and don't have an idea why. So much of what goes on from both sides is darn near unconstitutional. Look at the filibustering of court, diplomatic and administration positions. That is truly not in the constitution. ADVISE and CONSENT. Not our way or the highway. I have always considered myself adept at debate, but I really hate to, becaus e everybody is an expert, and nobody wants to have a point by point discussion on an issue. Nobody wants to listen to anything. So, Patriot Act, Sep. of C&S, Stem Cells, and the like... It is all a matter of Public Opinion. Lick your finger, put it in the air and see where the wind blows. z
-----
My life is a complicated drinking game.


"Master of Gentility" (in sarcasm, irony font) - kimj81

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:12 AM




Wow... this thread will for sure be hijacked! Lets keep it simple! I still fall back on everything being an issue. Some people vote on taxes, some on abortion, some on strict party lines and don't have an idea why. So much of what goes on from both sides is darn near unconstitutional. Look at the filibustering of court, diplomatic and administration positions. That is truly not in the constitution. ADVISE and CONSENT. Not our way or the highway. I have always considered myself adept at debate, but I really hate to, becaus e everybody is an expert, and nobody wants to have a point by point discussion on an issue. Nobody wants to listen to anything. So, Patriot Act, Sep. of C&S, Stem Cells, and the like... It is all a matter of Public Opinion. Lick your finger, put it in the air and see where the wind blows.
I submit the following picture to lighten things up.


-----
My life is a complicated drinking game.


"Master of Gentility" (in sarcasm, irony font) - kimj81

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:17 AM



Again, just playing devil's advocate here, then shouldn't separation of church and state apply to all forms of worship, not just those of Judeo Christian persuasion? Also... I'll give you a dollar, a real bill, no coins, if you can tell me where in the United States Constitution the EXACT phrase determining Separation of Church and State is. Hey.... shouldn't we be working or swimming or sumthin?
-----
My life is a complicated drinking game.


"Master of Gentility" (in sarcasm, irony font) - kimj81

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:23 AM

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:25 AM

I don't see the point of teaching creationism in a science class - it's not science, so what's the point?  Teach creationism in a religion class.

That said, while it has been proven that evolution occurs, there is not a current scientific theory for the actual creation of life on earth that holds up scientifically.  What they teach in high school biology  is not sound science.  The  idea that a "soup" of atoms miraculously reorganized in the conditions of early earth to form the first enzymes has been disproven in numerous experiments - the conditions they used in the initial lab work that backed this theory were ideal and unrealistic.  Watson and Crick (the dudes who discovered DNA) didn't even believe in this concept - one of them proposed that life was introduced to the earth from space.  I find it interesting that they still teach this as though it's proven science - I'm a science geek, and it bugs me.  There are thousands of physicists and biologists that are developing some really deep science to try and explain the origins of earth and the universe - they wouldn't be doing this if we already had all the answers.  Why can't biology textbooks at least state that this is only a theory at best, rather than acting like it's gospel?  Why do we have to teach our kids that we have all the asnwers, when we don't?

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:25 AM

The phrase "building a wall of separation between church and state" was actually first written by Thomas Jefferson when he was explaining the necessity of creating the First Amendment.

Jefferson’s interpretation of the first amendment in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association (January 1, 1802):
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.”

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:27 AM



Can I still have a dollar?

http://www.noapathy.org/tracts/mythofseparation.html

wocka wocka


-----
Chuck, I like you, but you're an a**hole. - kimj81

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:31 AM

For your consideration....

Kenneth R. Miller
Evolution: You Bet – It’s ‘Just’ a Theory
Of course evolution is a theory – the biology textbook already said so. So why did the Cobb County Board of Education order stickers affixed inside the book’s cover, warning students that evolution is a theory? Kenneth Miller, co-author of the textbook and a witness at the trial in federal district court, has a theory ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Isn’t evolution a theory? Of course it is. So why, on Jan. 13, 2005, did Federal District Judge Clarence Cooper order a board of education in Georgia to remove stickers from biology textbooks that seemed to tell students that evolution was just a theory? Is this a case of censorship? Is a closed-minded scientific establishment trying to keep evidence against evolution out of the classroom? Is a federal court telling educators that that evolution is now federally protected dogma?

 
The answer is far simpler. The judge simply read the sticker and saw that it served no scientific or educational purpose. Once that was clear, he looked to the reasons for slapping it in the textbooks of thousands of students, and here the record was equally clear. Insertion of the sticker favored a particular set of religious beliefs – exactly the argument advanced by the parents of six students in the district who sued the Cobb County Board of Education to get the stickers removed.

So what’s wrong with telling students that evolution is a theory? Nothing. But the textbook they were using already described evolution as a theory, and I ought to know. Joseph Levine and I wrote the biology book Cobb County’s high school students are using. Chapter 15 of the book is titled “Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.” Hard to be clearer than that. So why did the Cobb County Board of Education find it necessary to place a warning label inside a book that already refers to evolution as a theory? Judge Cooper hit the nail right on the head when he wrote that “By denigrating evolution, the school board appears to be endorsing the well-known prevailing alternative theory, creationism or variations thereof, even though the sticker does not specifically reference any alternative theories.”

Exactly. What the sticker said was that “Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things.” The problem with that wording is that evolution is both a theory and a fact. It is a fact that living things in the past were different from living things today and that the life of the past changed, or evolved, to produce the life of the present. Recent news, for example, reports the discovery of a new mammalian fossil in China that has a small dinosaur in its stomach. This fossil is a fact – clear evidence that some early mammals were able to prey upon dinosaurs, at least little ones. And it is just one of millions of fossils supporting the fact that life has changed over time, the fact of evolution.

How did that change take place? That’s exactly the question that evolutionary theory attempts to answer. Theories in science don’t become facts – rather, theories explain facts. Evolutionary theory is a comprehensive explanation of change supported by the facts of natural history, genetics and molecular biology.

Is evolution beyond dispute? Of course not. In fact, the most misleading part of the Cobb County sticker was its concluding sentence: “This material [evolution] should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.” Think about that. The sticker told students that there was just one subject in their textbooks that had to be approached with an open mind and critically considered. Apparently, we are certain of everything in biology except for evolution. To tell students that would be to mislead them utterly as to the true nature of biological wscience. What that sticker should have told students is something that our textbook makes clear in its opening pages. Namely, that everything in science should be approached with critical thinking and an open mind. Everything.

The forces of anti-evolution will pretend that the sticker case is an example of censorship and that the sinister forces of science have converged on Georgia classrooms to prevent honest and open examination of a controversial idea. There is great irony in such charges. As conservative icon Alan Bloom pointed out in his landmark book, The Closing of the American Mind, one of the worst forms of intellectual intolerance is to promote a false equivalence between competing ideas. Acting as though all ideas (or all theories) have equal standing actually deprives students of a realistic view of how critical analysis is done. That’s as true in science as it is in the cultural conflicts that were at the heart of Bloom’s book.

Judge Cooper saw this point clearly: “While evolution is subject to criticism, particularly with respect to the mechanism by which it occurred, the sticker misleads students regarding the significance and value of evolution in the scientific community.” Does it ever. In reality, evolution is a powerful and hard-working theory used at the cutting edge of scientific inquiry in developmental biology, genome analysis, drug discovery and scientific medicine. To pretend otherwise is to shield students from the reality of how science is done today.

What the removal of the sticker will actually do is not to close a window but to open one – a window that will let students see a science of biology in which all theories – not just one – are the result of constant, vigorous, critical analysis. A science in which evolution is at the centerpiece of a 21st-century revolution in our understanding of the grandeur and majesty of life.

So, what should be done with those stickers, now firmly glued into thousands of textbooks? Given the power and scope of the Judge’s ruling, I’d pass along a suggestion I received from a science teacher in Cobb County itself: Paste a bright, shiny American flag on top of each and every one of them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kenneth Miller is professor of biology at Brown University and co-author (with Joseph S. Levine) of Biology, published by Prentice Hall – the biology textbook used in the high schools of Cobb County, Ga. Miller also serves as chair of the Education Committee of The American Society for Cell Biology.

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:32 AM

I'm sorry, but that page is a load of crap. Particularly this sentence: "Our U.S. Constitution was founded on Biblical principles and it was the intention of the authors for this to be a Christian nation."

That's bullsh*t. This nation was founded on, among other things, the freedom from religious oppression. The idea that this would be a "Christian nation" is completely antithetical to that.

-----
Jim Christian
__________________________
Owner/operator Type B Multisport

RE: What evolution debate?
BY: Guest on 2005-08-05 11:32 AM

Actually, the scientific community does not propose that is was a miraculous event. They don't use miracles as explanations of events. And there are supportable theories of evolution but the evolutionary scientists are still hashing out the details - as they should be.

Watson and Crick stole the research of a female scientist who died as a result of the radiation she exposed herself to in her pursuit of knowledge. She took all the chances and they stole her research and films. More importantly, they were not evolutionary scientists; they were molecular biologists.

You are confusing the fact of evolution with the theory of evolution. The facts of evolution are taught in science since they deal with scientific matters. The theory  - the structure for explaining the facts - belongs in science. Where would you put it? Spanish class? Finally, scientists don't claim to have the all answers. They have all the questions!