....ID..
..Evolution
Posted on 03/31/2006 7:18:12 PM PST by Virginia-American
LIBERTY, Mo. — Monday morning, Room 207: First day of a unit on the origins of life. Veteran biology teacher Al Frisby switches on the overhead projector and braces himself.
As his students rummage for their notebooks, Frisby introduces his central theme: Every creature on Earth has been shaped by random mutation and natural selection — in a word, by evolution.
The challenges begin at once.
"Isn't it true that mutations only make an animal weaker?" sophomore Chris Willett
....
Frisby tries to explain that evolution takes millions of years, but Willett isn't listening. "I feel a tail growing!" he calls to his friends, drawing laughter.
.....
He's about to start on the fossil evidence when sophomore Jeff Paul interrupts: "How are you 100% sure that those bones belong to those animals? It could just be some deformed raccoon."
From the back of the room, sophomore Melissa Brooks chimes in: "Those are real bones that someone actually found? You're not just making this up?"
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
That's true. Behe and Dembski have said that they accept the theory of common descent (including apes and humans). Behe testified (in the Dover trial) that as far as he could tell, the hypothetical designer could have died millions of years ago.
Their main problems are with abiogenesis.
The (presumably Biblical) creationists, aka YEC-ists, (actually the children of the YEC-ists) are the disruptive ones in this article.
I had one who told us that Teflon was a Communist plot -- by making iron skillets unnecessary, our women would not develop the arm strength necessary to shoot a rifle correctly.
That's how we were taught. It was pretty obvious that you needed a bit more than introductory calculus to do the calculations, but we learned about things like bond angles.
....ID....Evolution
About the topic of this thread, I always *did* wonder where the people interviewed on Jay Leno's "Jaywalking" segment on The Tonight Show came from.
This seems to answer my question. :-)
Cheers!
And all three made major advances in biology. What have you done?
Now, now. Remember that the church is based more (loosely speaking) on scholasticism and the sciences (loosely speaking) on empiricism. So for those coming out of that sort of back ground, quote-mining is as close to research as they get...
Full Disclosure: ...has anyone seen any post-feminist deconstructions of evolution lately?
Cheers!
About the topic of this thread, I always *did* wonder where the people interviewed on Jay Leno's "Jaywalking" segment on The Tonight Show came from.
The name of the place is America.
Reminds me of a story about Dirac. He gave a lecture on some aspect of QM, and it was almost entirely taken up with group theory. At the end, the first question was, "Didn't you say that the lecture would not involve group theory?" He replied, "No, I said it would not require PRIOR KNOWLEDGE of group theory."
As to QM and high school chemistry, I recall learning ad hoc rules about orbitals and bond angles, but I think I accepted them as such, without any real appreciation that they derived from a more general theory.
And BTW, this really does relate to the topic of this thread! Does not life require water? What is water and where did it come from?
K4: I was thinking the same thing while reviewing the fossil record for transitional macro-evolutionary forms
You should have asked a FReeper for help
This is a very interesting set of essays:
The Fossil Record: Evolution or "Scientific Creation" by Clifford A. Cuffey
You may have seen
this in other crevo threads. It's from essay 5. Cuffey says
As previously stated, a succession of transitional fossils exists that link reptiles (Class Reptilia) and mammals (Class Mammalia). These particular reptiles are classifie as Subclass Synapsida. Presently, this is the best example of th e transformation of one major higher taxon into another. The morphologic changes that took place are well documented by fossils, beginning with animals essentially 100% reptilian and resulting in animals essentially 100% mammalian. Therefore, I have chosen this as the example to summarize in more detail (Table 1, Fig. 1).
At least read essay 5, and study the table there.
The web site is interesting, it's the home of the Gulf Coast Section of the Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists. These guys make big $$ prospecting for oil and other minerals.
If YEC Flood geology were more accurate, they'd use it and make more money.
But instead, they publish articles about normal geology and paleontology.
We can say that the market has decided that Flood geology is false, and that evolution is true.
Historically, this is a crucial point, and it is what led Wallace to formulate his theory. "Micro" evolution was obvious, but when he looked for its limits, it became clear that there was no place to draw the line.
But the problem, as I see it, is this. The IDers and the Creationists and the "Teach the Controversy" advocates seem to want to believe that their side is EQUAL to the current knowledge and scientific data.
It is not. Not by a long shot.
They would have us (and gullible teenagers) believe that there is a serious scientific controversy on this issue, when there is almost none. Given the total lack of real science supporting ID, it's ridiculous to posit that it should presented at all, much less on equal footing with evolution.
I know it's comforting for some to believe that supporters of evolution reject ID out of some atheistic bias, but that is just not the case. Present the evidence, do the science, SHOW people that ID is real, and I assure you, it will be accepted.
The notion that scientists all work together in some sort of cabal to suppress new ideas is nonsense. It is the new ideas that win Nobel Prizes and assure a place in history for the discoverer. The history of science is full of examples of people coming up with BETTER ideas, but those ideas had to actually WORK.
ID does not do that. As philosophy, it's fine. As science, it's moribund.
But instead, they publish articles about normal geology and paleontology.
We can say that the market has decided that Flood geology is false, and that
Counterexample QUIP!
"Physics isn't a religion, if it was, it would be a lot easier to make money." -- 1988 Physics Nobelist Leon Lederman.
Actually a pretty funny guy, consider this other quote from one of his "popularizing" science books: "I feel like Zza Zza Gabor's seventh husband. I know what to do, but how do you make it interesting?"
Cheers!
But sincerly, thank you for the links. I will follow it later this weekend and read through the information you posted. I at least owe you that for taking the time to post it, and I would short myself the gainful insite into what it provides the debate.
Regards, K4 self ping
Darn it, I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO LEARN CHINESE JUST TO STAY COMPETITIVE!!!
I went to public school, and can say the same thing. I can imagine my parents' reaction if word got back that I was disrupting class...
Van Dreele? Do you mean
Mr. Van Driessen?
:-)
I miss Beavis and Butthead.
Reads like a novel. Is this supposed to be hard reportage? or is this crafted by a pseudo-news-reporter entertainer/author in search of a Pulitzer?
Yup. But it's only a matter of time before you see so-called "conservatives" defending students' "right" to be disruptive.
The conservative movement has lost its soul.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.