ForumsWEPRIs it OK to teach evolution in public schools?

367 40916
shortstopkid123
offline
shortstopkid123
20 posts
Peasant

Many parents argue about schools teaching evolution. Creationalists do not support or believe in the theory of evolution. It goes against their beliefs. They do not believe it should be taught because it apposes many peoples' beliefs. Do you think that it should be taught?

Notes:
Lets try not point out certain religions. I am saying creationalists for a reason.

  • 367 Replies
ArchlordPie
offline
ArchlordPie
151 posts
Scribe

Wow. 20 pages and only one mention of either micro- or macro-evolution. I am very disappointed. Let me put this in simple terms.

Micro-evolution: The concept of genetic mutations resulting in variances within individual species. This has been observed and is scientifically proven to happen.

Macro-evolution: The concept of species changing into other species via genetic mutations. This has not been observed but is still touted as "fact" by far too many people, even though it's the best explanation science has for where all the different species on earth came from.

To answer the titular question, yes, it is OK, because it (at least the micro part) is proven scientific fact. I personally wish they did a better job of differentiating between micro and macro so as to be less confusing/misleading, but... meh.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,498 posts
Blacksmith

I just got assigned a paper in english. I have to write it about something debatable and this gave me some good ideas


Keep in mind the debate is not among the scientific community, but with the general public and the religious in particular.

Macro-evolution: The concept of species changing into other species via genetic mutations. This has not been observed but is still touted as "fact" by far too many people, even though it's the best explanation science has for where all the different species on earth came from.


http://www.epicgifs.net/images/show/6SD3VJN7


29+ Cases for Macroevolution
Observed Instances of Speciation
Evolution and Information: The Nylon Bug
Ring Species: Unusual Demonstrations of Speciation

I personally wish they did a better job of differentiating between micro and macro so as to be less confusing/misleading, but... meh.


It's really not that important as it's all the same process.
pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,991 posts
Scribe

this topic will turn into a flamewar at the drop of a hat.


...you do realize that this thread is on its 20th page, right?

That hat is taking its sweet time falling
Bladerunner679
offline
Bladerunner679
2,491 posts
Jester

Macro-evolution: The concept of species changing into other species via genetic mutations. This has not been observed but is still touted as "fact" by far too many people, even though it's the best explanation science has for where all the different species on earth came from.


A lesson from school actually shows macro-evolution at work. A good case is sickle-cell anemia in people of African descent, and how carriers for the gene are resistant to malaria. This is evidence enough for macro-evolution, and I don't even need to go into the peppered moth observation.

-Blade
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,498 posts
Blacksmith

A lesson from school actually shows macro-evolution at work. A good case is sickle-cell anemia in people of African descent, and how carriers for the gene are resistant to malaria. This is evidence enough for macro-evolution, and I don't even need to go into the peppered moth observation.


While these are good examples of evolution they wouldn't be examples of macroevolution. as these aren't a splitting of species.
wontgetmycatnip
offline
wontgetmycatnip
95 posts
Shepherd

I don't think public schools should teach this... "evolution" or whatever. Public schools are funded by the government, tax dollars, and the government was founded under God.


Read: First Amendment, Treaty of Tripoli

No, don't teach this "evolution" public schools, because you are putting shame to America and they are pretty much dissing the constitution and all the "in God we trust" stuff.


"In god we trust" was adopted in 1956.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
Bard

No, don't teach this "evolution" public schools, because you are putting shame to America and they are pretty much dissing the constitution and all the "in God we trust" stuff.

maybe you shouldn't trust in god. he is a awful guy you know.
xeano321
offline
xeano321
3,083 posts
Blacksmith

Well, I hate to say, but the validity of the theory is a little shaky for me to believe it's true.

HahiHa
online
HahiHa
7,111 posts
Grand Duke

Well, I hate to say, but the validity of the theory is a little shaky for me to believe it's true.

You must not have looked at enough evidence yet. But it is out there. Any way you could tell us what you find shaky so we can remedy that?
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
Scribe

Well, I hate to say, but the validity of the theory is a little shaky for me to believe it's true.


Be specific. What do you think is too shaky for it to be valid? Because literally 99.99% of the professional scientific community accept evolution as fact. It's a cornerstone of modern biology. It's supported by numerous other fields of science in the timeline aspect, we've used it in agriculture and medical fields, and much, much more.
ArchlordPie
offline
ArchlordPie
151 posts
Scribe

A lesson from school actually shows macro-evolution at work. A good case is sickle-cell anemia in people of African descent, and how carriers for the gene are resistant to malaria. This is evidence enough for macro-evolution, and I don't even need to go into the peppered moth observation.


Like Mage said, this isn't macroevolution. It's a great example of microevolution though.

The thing is that micro and macro aren't the same thing. They're both caused by the same thing (genetic mutations), but they are not the same process. Microevolution doesn't make new species. Macroevolution does.

Please, PLEASE make that distinction. Leaving them clumped together under the umbrella term of "evolution" is only going to confuse scientific fact with well-supported-but-not-100%-proven-quite-yet theory.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,498 posts
Blacksmith

The thing is that micro and macro aren't the same thing. They're both caused by the same thing (genetic mutations), but they are not the same process. Microevolution doesn't make new species. Macroevolution does.


Yes it is the same thing, just on different scales. All it's doing is making a distinction on the level of change that occurred. Many don't even bother with this as it's all allele frequency change.

Please, PLEASE make that distinction. Leaving them clumped together under the umbrella term of "evolution" is only going to confuse scientific fact with well-supported-but-not-100%-proven-quite-yet theory.


Please don't ignore the examples of macroevolution that were provided for you.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,063 posts
Farmer

The thing is that micro and macro aren't the same thing. They're both caused by the same thing (genetic mutations), but they are not the same process. Microevolution doesn't make new species. Macroevolution does.


The difference between micro and macro evolution is the difference between a foot and a yard.

Many creationists believe micro and macro evolution are two different processes. They aren't. They're the exact same process.
wontgetmycatnip
offline
wontgetmycatnip
95 posts
Shepherd

The thing is that micro and macro aren't the same thing. They're both caused by the same thing (genetic mutations), but they are not the same process. Microevolution doesn't make new species. Macroevolution does.


That's like saying that taking a walk to a house two doors down and walking a marathon aren't the same process.
StormWalker
offline
StormWalker
8,285 posts
Scribe

I'll just answer the question without intruding upon the conversation...
I don't see why it wouldn't be okay to teach it. It's perfectly scientific fact. Even if Darwin didn't have a degree in theology, it still makes a lot of sense about all the homologous structures and whatever else it was that's written on my Biology notes.

Showing 196-210 of 367