arktimes.com— Not only is this Arkansas science teacher prohibited from saying the "e-word" in class, but he can only say that 300 million year old rocks are "very, very old".
Mar 24, 2006View in Crawl 4
I think some of the posters are forgetting one thing: we don't need to go back in time to observe evolution and its cohort natural selection and adaptation. Pick up any number of books and medical journals and you will see articles and research papers detailing the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Many years ago, penicillin was touted as a wonder-drug. However, today, we need the likes of vancomycin, Synercid, Linezolid, and a host of quinolones to combat bacterial infections. However even in the few years that vancomycin has been in use, we have seen the occurrence of VISA (vancomycin intermediate resistant Staphylococcus aureus) as well as the full-blown resistant variety. Some institutions have been finding and storing Staphyloccocus aureus and Enterrococcus samples for the last decade (even before some of the newer drugs have been introduced). The result? They can see the changes in DNA and phenotypes of the bacteria as they adapt to the new drugs. In fact, some particular strains have actually changed so much they depend on the drugs to function! It's scary to think that the flesh-eating bacteria (Necrotizing fasciitis) are also developing immunities to our medicines.Yes, these bacteria have not become new species, but if one compares the sample of the bacteria from 30 years ago to one today, they are so dissimilar that a person unknowing of their incredible mutation powers would mistaken them for different species (in fact, in this war of us versus bacteria, mistaking a resistant bacteria for a new species is all too common). I mean, some of them have developed much thicker walls, developed new pumps for removing the antibiotics, developed new mechanisms inside and out to neutralize and circumvent the drugs. Some of these bacteria are so different structurally from their original counterparts that they would not longer be able to swap pieces of genetic material (the definition of a species!) without the intervention of a lab.Sorry for this tirade, but natural selection does occur.Evolution is NOT a monkey turning into a man. Sadly, that is what those Arkansas kids are going to grow up thinking. Evolution is the process fueled by natural selection in which organisms become so different that they are no longer able to produce viable offspring with one another. If we didn't all have a common ancestor, why do all chordates (vertebrates) develop gill slits (note I said slits, not functional gills) during the embryonic stage of development only to disappear shortly thereafter? Is this some sort of theatrical entertainment for the All-Mighty? Mind you, without MODERN SCIENCE, we wouldn't even be able to observe these pharyngeal slits...so did he put them there for amusement so he can see something "fishy" pop up and then disappear from us?
I will never understand the debate of "intelligent design" vs. evolution. The intelligent design crowd always have two arguments: 1) The Bible says so (Faith) and 2) "evolution was proved wrong here.....evolution was proved wrong there...bla bla bla" ....it's always pointing out where evolution has failed to show proof. Can someone please show me proof that jesus christ exists? The bible is bulls**t, do not refer to that. So, basically, the intelligent design lovers argue that evolution didnt occur because of inconsistencies here or there, when there is no proof of a god. One more thing....i think it should be renamed "retarded design". What kind of asshat god creates everything but leaves us with little things like cancer, pain and suffering, etc
I think we can conclude that a large majority of Digg users accept Evolution as a practical and accurate science.This is the best thing to come out of this whole story. When I initially read the story I felt saddened for America - now I feel confident young Americans are actually on the right track. Thank you Digg.
But MavenRaphene, the multiple meanings is exactly my point... you cannot deny that often when the word is used to refute evolution's viability, it's used exactly as you define -- as "speculation" compared to another topic that perhaps IS speculation. I won't deny that "theory" can mean "speculation" in certain contexts, just not in this one. And no, unfortunately it's NOT always preceded by "scientific" when it is so.It's unfortunate that so many of these hillbilly school board members know the "speculation" context but have absolutely no inkling what the scientific method is, and how it is inextricable from the scientific definition of "theory". Meanwhile they endanger our children by placing a topic which is social/cultural in opposition to one that is scientific.And tonage... yes, the people who lack the understanding to discern science from faith and insist upon opining on those topics are "just dumb".I know NOTHING about Java the programming language, but plenty about Java the hot beverage, and you will not hear me insisting you cannot program an application using coffee grinds.
not trying to start anything, but isn't' that what democracy is. state's rights are constantly being trampled on, and if an entire state wants to teach evolution and ID, the federal government shouldn't be able to interfere. ID does not establish any religion over another, and therefore does not break the constitution.The problem is too much government. let the states decide (democratically).
Congrats. Then teach your Daughter whatever you want.Though on that note, you cannot claim that Evolution, as taught in schools, is fact. There are many MANY holes in what they teach in school, especially in terms of evolution. Irreducable Complexity isn't even mentioned, among other things that at least call to question the idea of evolution. Look at it like this: You want evolution taught. Someone like myself would at least like mention of the concept of intelligent design. Both can coexist, but not with the current attitudes around learning. As a student I was forced to swallow a lot of what I believe to be bulls**t regarding the evolurionary process. Did I jump up and down and stomp my feet? No. I wrote a letter to the School Board citing my beliefs and evidence backing it. Didn't change a thing, but I did my part. That's what is important. Anyway, just throwing this out there as there are still MANY viable alternatives to the currently taught theory of evolution.
Who told you that God is not powerful enough to create the universe already old ? We human tend to think everything has to have a beginning somewhere because we've never seen anything without a start.Earth could be old but life can not. Anything living tends to die due to mutations in the DNA. Your old cat will most likely die because it's old, over the years the cells have had too many mutations in the DNA(degradation) and reproduction of the cells is not good and fast enough to keep it alive. If life would exist for millions of years believe me by now we would have lives faaaar more than 100 years ! Isn't that the point of evolution ? Life is perfecting itself, right ? And all it could do in millions of years is just some 70-80 years of life ? What kind of perfection is that ?Real science tells us that in order for some mechanism to work it has to be precalculated and designed to do its certain function. That's not what the "science" of evolution tells us... anything could happen by the chance if allowed millions of year to wait... Bulls**t !!!Recently there was a discovery that dinosaurs coexisted with their ancestors... <a class="user" href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/07/20/dino.ancestors.ap/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/07/20/dino.ancestors.ap/index.html</a>What a proof to evolution is it after such a discovery ? Doesn't that look more like bible tells us how life was in the beginning and every animal coexisted with other animals.Did you know that science of astronomy was based 100% on a belief that is not even real and true? There is a totally different picture of the stars in the reality. The light from the newborn star reaches the Earth in some millions of years after the star is born and after it dies we could see it for some millions of years, so what you see in the sky is not even real, it's not there, it's just a bunch of photons that we study. Not the stars because most of them are not there !Science is better with a Creator !
Almost every person in the USSR was bulls**ted, around 300 million of people thought they're progressing forward with their strict socialism. People didn't know no other story except evolution and there was no place for God in that country. What are the results ? It fell apart and affected millions of people bringing them 20-30 years backwards comparing to all other european countries.USA will move backwards WITHOUT GOD, not with Him.God bless you all !
jtravisMar 24, 2006
thats not a form of evolution. we pick and choose what we want.if the same result happened due to natural reasons...that would be evolution
sprint111Mar 24, 2006
I think some of the posters are forgetting one thing: we don't need to go back in time to observe evolution and its cohort natural selection and adaptation. Pick up any number of books and medical journals and you will see articles and research papers detailing the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Many years ago, penicillin was touted as a wonder-drug. However, today, we need the likes of vancomycin, Synercid, Linezolid, and a host of quinolones to combat bacterial infections. However even in the few years that vancomycin has been in use, we have seen the occurrence of VISA (vancomycin intermediate resistant Staphylococcus aureus) as well as the full-blown resistant variety. Some institutions have been finding and storing Staphyloccocus aureus and Enterrococcus samples for the last decade (even before some of the newer drugs have been introduced). The result? They can see the changes in DNA and phenotypes of the bacteria as they adapt to the new drugs. In fact, some particular strains have actually changed so much they depend on the drugs to function! It's scary to think that the flesh-eating bacteria (Necrotizing fasciitis) are also developing immunities to our medicines.Yes, these bacteria have not become new species, but if one compares the sample of the bacteria from 30 years ago to one today, they are so dissimilar that a person unknowing of their incredible mutation powers would mistaken them for different species (in fact, in this war of us versus bacteria, mistaking a resistant bacteria for a new species is all too common). I mean, some of them have developed much thicker walls, developed new pumps for removing the antibiotics, developed new mechanisms inside and out to neutralize and circumvent the drugs. Some of these bacteria are so different structurally from their original counterparts that they would not longer be able to swap pieces of genetic material (the definition of a species!) without the intervention of a lab.Sorry for this tirade, but natural selection does occur.Evolution is NOT a monkey turning into a man. Sadly, that is what those Arkansas kids are going to grow up thinking. Evolution is the process fueled by natural selection in which organisms become so different that they are no longer able to produce viable offspring with one another. If we didn't all have a common ancestor, why do all chordates (vertebrates) develop gill slits (note I said slits, not functional gills) during the embryonic stage of development only to disappear shortly thereafter? Is this some sort of theatrical entertainment for the All-Mighty? Mind you, without MODERN SCIENCE, we wouldn't even be able to observe these pharyngeal slits...so did he put them there for amusement so he can see something "fishy" pop up and then disappear from us?
pottymouthMar 24, 2006
I will never understand the debate of "intelligent design" vs. evolution. The intelligent design crowd always have two arguments: 1) The Bible says so (Faith) and 2) "evolution was proved wrong here.....evolution was proved wrong there...bla bla bla" ....it's always pointing out where evolution has failed to show proof. Can someone please show me proof that jesus christ exists? The bible is bulls**t, do not refer to that. So, basically, the intelligent design lovers argue that evolution didnt occur because of inconsistencies here or there, when there is no proof of a god. One more thing....i think it should be renamed "retarded design". What kind of asshat god creates everything but leaves us with little things like cancer, pain and suffering, etc
Closed AccountMar 24, 2006
PCmohammed would get a Mac
yukevsterMar 25, 2006
I think we can conclude that a large majority of Digg users accept Evolution as a practical and accurate science.This is the best thing to come out of this whole story. When I initially read the story I felt saddened for America - now I feel confident young Americans are actually on the right track. Thank you Digg.
magwichMar 25, 2006
Do you evolutionist contend we "evolved" from a single cell organism?
rlutterbMar 25, 2006
But MavenRaphene, the multiple meanings is exactly my point... you cannot deny that often when the word is used to refute evolution's viability, it's used exactly as you define -- as "speculation" compared to another topic that perhaps IS speculation. I won't deny that "theory" can mean "speculation" in certain contexts, just not in this one. And no, unfortunately it's NOT always preceded by "scientific" when it is so.It's unfortunate that so many of these hillbilly school board members know the "speculation" context but have absolutely no inkling what the scientific method is, and how it is inextricable from the scientific definition of "theory". Meanwhile they endanger our children by placing a topic which is social/cultural in opposition to one that is scientific.And tonage... yes, the people who lack the understanding to discern science from faith and insist upon opining on those topics are "just dumb".I know NOTHING about Java the programming language, but plenty about Java the hot beverage, and you will not hear me insisting you cannot program an application using coffee grinds.
crazynicMar 25, 2006
I'm assuming this is a sarcastic comment...
diggnateMar 27, 2006
not trying to start anything, but isn't' that what democracy is. state's rights are constantly being trampled on, and if an entire state wants to teach evolution and ID, the federal government shouldn't be able to interfere. ID does not establish any religion over another, and therefore does not break the constitution.The problem is too much government. let the states decide (democratically).
continuityMar 28, 2006
If you like dogs or want your kids to learn facts, then move.
bristolzMar 28, 2006
I think they have a perfect understanding of faith; there's no there there.
tonageApr 22, 2006
Yea, if someone disagrees with you, they must just be looking at it wrong. Afterall, you could never be wrong.
gothamcityprjctJul 26, 2006
@Continuity: Though some of us don't see religion and science as forces in opposition of each other...
gothamcityprjctJul 26, 2006
Congrats. Then teach your Daughter whatever you want.Though on that note, you cannot claim that Evolution, as taught in schools, is fact. There are many MANY holes in what they teach in school, especially in terms of evolution. Irreducable Complexity isn't even mentioned, among other things that at least call to question the idea of evolution. Look at it like this: You want evolution taught. Someone like myself would at least like mention of the concept of intelligent design. Both can coexist, but not with the current attitudes around learning. As a student I was forced to swallow a lot of what I believe to be bulls**t regarding the evolurionary process. Did I jump up and down and stomp my feet? No. I wrote a letter to the School Board citing my beliefs and evidence backing it. Didn't change a thing, but I did my part. That's what is important. Anyway, just throwing this out there as there are still MANY viable alternatives to the currently taught theory of evolution.
adriaan90Aug 12, 2006
Haha evolution! Who still believes that crap! Hahahaahah
magwichAug 20, 2006
Where do you believe the first cell came from?
msurguyAug 14, 2007
Who told you that God is not powerful enough to create the universe already old ? We human tend to think everything has to have a beginning somewhere because we've never seen anything without a start.Earth could be old but life can not. Anything living tends to die due to mutations in the DNA. Your old cat will most likely die because it's old, over the years the cells have had too many mutations in the DNA(degradation) and reproduction of the cells is not good and fast enough to keep it alive. If life would exist for millions of years believe me by now we would have lives faaaar more than 100 years ! Isn't that the point of evolution ? Life is perfecting itself, right ? And all it could do in millions of years is just some 70-80 years of life ? What kind of perfection is that ?Real science tells us that in order for some mechanism to work it has to be precalculated and designed to do its certain function. That's not what the "science" of evolution tells us... anything could happen by the chance if allowed millions of year to wait... Bulls**t !!!Recently there was a discovery that dinosaurs coexisted with their ancestors... <a class="user" href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/07/20/dino.ancestors.ap/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/07/20/dino.ancestors.ap/index.html</a>What a proof to evolution is it after such a discovery ? Doesn't that look more like bible tells us how life was in the beginning and every animal coexisted with other animals.Did you know that science of astronomy was based 100% on a belief that is not even real and true? There is a totally different picture of the stars in the reality. The light from the newborn star reaches the Earth in some millions of years after the star is born and after it dies we could see it for some millions of years, so what you see in the sky is not even real, it's not there, it's just a bunch of photons that we study. Not the stars because most of them are not there !Science is better with a Creator !
msurguyAug 14, 2007
Almost every person in the USSR was bulls**ted, around 300 million of people thought they're progressing forward with their strict socialism. People didn't know no other story except evolution and there was no place for God in that country. What are the results ? It fell apart and affected millions of people bringing them 20-30 years backwards comparing to all other european countries.USA will move backwards WITHOUT GOD, not with Him.God bless you all !