Should Evolution be taught in State Schools?

[Sociobiology]

not just observed we can reproduce evolution in a lab.

I know, but then you run into the "then it must have a creator" bunch. The underground mosquitos are a pretty damn good example of evolution by natural selection occurring by itself. I mean what, did god just create a bunch of mosquitos that were adapted to living in underground train systems, then keep them alive for 6000 years until we invented underground trains just so that they could bite the shit out of us? Of course, when we look at it, we can see that their genetic variation is consistent with evolution (as we have observed it to occur) and that the specific traits they have make them well adapted to life in the underground, which means they survive well there. And this all happened naturally without the intervention of humans with regard to the mosquito itself. And they are a different species from the above ground. It really covers so many of the bases.

It may be worth noting I am not talking about artificial selection but normal natural selection in a laboratory setting, where it can be recorded sampled and even rerun with different conditions. the long term e coli experiment is a wonderful thing.
But yes I understand the type, just counter with fire... as an example, not actual fire, however tempting it may be.

[Vault 1]

Not to speak to who's right and who is wrong, but just to put it out there - see, the sooner you admit evolution is a lie, the sooner you can come up with another theory.

Even Darwin himself was a theistic evolutionist, not an atheist.

[Neutraligon]

Not to speak to who's right and who is wrong, but just to put it out there - see, the sooner you admit evolution is a lie, the sooner you can come up with another theory.

Even Darwin himself was a theistic evolutionist, not an atheist.

The sooner we have a more accurate theory than evolution, the sooner we'll drop evolution.

[Individuality-ness]

Not to speak to who's right and who is wrong, but just to put it out there - see, the sooner you admit evolution is a lie, the sooner you can come up with another theory.

Even Darwin himself was a theistic evolutionist, not an atheist.

. . .

[Person012345]

Not to speak to who's right and who is wrong, but just to put it out there - see, the sooner you admit evolution is a lie, the sooner you can come up with another theory.

Even Darwin himself was a theistic evolutionist, not an atheist.

Who cares what Darwin was. Darwin could have completely disavowed his theories soon after formulating them and it wouldn't make any difference to their validity.

Why would we want to declare evolution a lie when it is so well supported? As soon as we admit the germ theory of disease is a lie the sooner we can come up with another theory too.

[Farnhamia]

Not to speak to who's right and who is wrong, but just to put it out there - see, the sooner you admit evolution is a lie, the sooner you can come up with another theory.

Even Darwin himself was a theistic evolutionist, not an atheist.

Not really, no. Perhaps at one point in his development, but by the end, he was pretty much an atheist.

[Tlaceceyaya]

Not to speak to who's right and who is wrong, but just to put it out there - see, the sooner you admit evolution is a lie, the sooner you can come up with another theory.

Even Darwin himself was a theistic evolutionist, not an atheist.

The sooner we have a more accurate theory than evolution, the sooner we'll drop evolution.

Impossible, because evolution is observation. Natural selection is the theory. It's possible to drop natural selection. Not evolution.

But where has evolution been observed? Richard Lenski did an experiment conclusively demonstrating it.

We also can't float gravity away or move away from continental drift.

[The Daktanese Technocracy]

Not to speak to who's right and who is wrong, but just to put it out there - see, the sooner you admit evolution is a lie, the sooner you can come up with another theory.

Even Darwin himself was a theistic evolutionist, not an atheist.

Darwin doesn't matter. And Evolution is not a lie, it's a observable fact. You can't prove evolution wrong at this point. Seriously, get over yourself.

[Mavorpen]

Not to speak to who's right and who is wrong, but just to put it out there - see, the sooner you admit evolution is a lie, the sooner you can come up with another theory.

Even Darwin himself was a theistic evolutionist, not an atheist.

Not really, no. Perhaps at one point in his development, but by the end, he was pretty much an atheist.

Contrary to popular belief, Darwin was still a devout theist when he left the Galapagos. He became an atheist when a family member died iirc.

[Farnhamia]

Not really, no. Perhaps at one point in his development, but by the end, he was pretty much an atheist.

Contrary to popular belief, Darwin was still a devout theist when he left the Galapagos. He became an atheist when a family member died iirc.

Very true:

"During these two years I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, & I remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come, by this time, (i.e. 1836 to 1839) to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, rainbow as a sign, &c., &c., & from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian."[42]

[Neutraligon]

The sooner we have a more accurate theory than evolution, the sooner we'll drop evolution.

Impossible, because evolution is observation. Natural selection is the theory. It's possible to drop natural selection. Not evolution.

But where has evolution been observed? Richard Lenski did an experiment conclusively demonstrating it.

We also can't float gravity away or move away from continental drift.

OK sorry theory of natural selection.

[Manahakatouki]

Not really, no. Perhaps at one point in his development, but by the end, he was pretty much an atheist.

Contrary to popular belief, Darwin was still a devout theist when he left the Galapagos. He became an atheist when a family member died iirc.

I've heard this, and really it did make more sense...

In the time period he lived in, his research gatherings probably wouldn't change his mind about God and all...

It would be an emotional thing, coupled with his feeling of betrayal from the Church that would make him atheist later...

[Vault 1]

The sooner we have a more accurate theory than evolution, the sooner we'll drop evolution.

And all the effort being spent defending this outdated notion is effort not spent working on that new, plausible theory.

Face it: You have been trolled. A Christian man himself, Darwin put down a flight of speculative prose to make fun of the nonbelievers, and with success that hasn't been repeated since - forever earning him a place beside Timecop, Patriotic Nigras and BloodNinja.

[Mavorpen]

The sooner we have a more accurate theory than evolution, the sooner we'll drop evolution.

And all the effort being spent defending this outdated notion is effort not spent working on that new, plausible theory.

Face it: You have been trolled. A Christian man himself, Darwin put down a flight of speculative prose to make fun of the nonbelievers, and with success that hasn't been repeated since - forever earning him a place beside Timecop, Patriotic Nigras and BloodNinja.

I'm going to assume you're 12 and have yet to be in a high school science course.

[Tlaceceyaya]

And all the effort being spent defending this outdated notion is effort not spent working on that new, plausible theory.

Face it: You have been trolled. A Christian man himself, Darwin put down a flight of speculative prose to make fun of the nonbelievers, and with success that hasn't been repeated since - forever earning him a place beside Timecop, Patriotic Nigras and BloodNinja.

I'm going to assume you're 12 and have yet to be in a high school science course.

He's trolling.

[Person012345]

The sooner we have a more accurate theory than evolution, the sooner we'll drop evolution.

Impossible, because evolution is observation. Natural selection is the theory. It's possible to drop natural selection. Not evolution.

But where has evolution been observed? Richard Lenski did an experiment conclusively demonstrating it.

We also can't float gravity away or move away from continental drift.

No, natural selection is observable. You know how everyone is bawwing that the pandas are going to die? That's natural selection. We're better than Pandas. Natural selection is observable. The theory part is putting evolution with natural selection (the theory explains how it all works) but the key thing here is that a theory is an idea that has to be well supported by the observable evidence. It's not simply pulled out of ones ass.

[Mavorpen]

I'm going to assume you're 12 and have yet to be in a high school science course.

He's trolling.

What's the difference?

[Big Jim P]

Why would we want to dumb down our education system any further by teaching creationism/ID? If some people want to continue to remain willfully ignorant of reality (by believing in creationism/id), then that is their business, but they should not be allowed to inflict their stupidity on others.

[Individuality-ness]

He's trolling.

What's the difference?

One of them is innocent ignorance. The other is done to ignite reaction on purpose.

[Vault 1]

He's trolling.

...because everyone who challenges the popular conceptions and misconceptions must, obviously, be a troll.

They certainly said it about Darwin when he presented his hypothesis as well - except that once they were right.

[Person012345]

He's trolling.

...because everyone who challenges the popular conceptions and misconceptions must, obviously, be a troll.

They certainly said it about Darwin when he presented his hypothesis as well - except that once they were right.

You actually going to address any points or carry on throwing out meaningless rhetoric?

[Milks Empire]

Why would we want to dumb down our education system any further by teaching creationism/ID? If some people want to continue to remain willfully ignorant of reality (by believing in creationism/id), then that is their business, but they should not be allowed to inflict their stupidity on others.

SO THIS.

[Keronians]

Contrary to popular belief, Darwin was still a devout theist when he left the Galapagos. He became an atheist when a family member died iirc.

Very true:

"During these two years I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, & I remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come, by this time, (i.e. 1836 to 1839) to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, rainbow as a sign, &c., &c., & from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian."[42]

Er, thanks for that, Darwin? Love you too.

[Segland]

Chalk me up as the lower left on that chart.

Seconded.

[Person012345]

Very true:

"During these two years I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, & I remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come, by this time, (i.e. 1836 to 1839) to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, rainbow as a sign, &c., &c., & from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian."[42]

Er, thanks for that, Darwin? Love you too.

To be fair he was just saying that religions are a load of twaddle. At least he specifically didn't include you in the barbarian label.