• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which should be taught in school science classes?

Which should be taught in school science classes?

  • Total voters
    84
friday said:
Marduc, give me one example of two different species where we have a completed chain of fossils demonstrating the evolutionary process between the two.
Click to expand...

we will never have a "complete" chain because not every critter that lives becomes a fossil, and for every link found there are two new ones missing, I am not going to fall for your predictable and all too common fools errand
 
roguenuke said:
So I have seen some people place evolution at the same level as intelligent design and even creationism in saying that it is simply a belief. While certain explainations of evolution are a belief, biological evolution itself actually has physical evidence to support it. And even Natural Selection has some evidence to support it.

Now I actually believe somewhat in intelligent design, but also recognize that it is a belief without evidence to support it. Of course, my own beliefs on ID probably differ greatly on how most believe in ID. In fact, I probably would describe my beliefs as a hybrid between ID and Natural Selection.

Now, I am not asking in the poll what you personally believe, but rather what you think should be taught to students. It would be good, however, to include in your response what you personally believe and/or an explanation on what should be taught.

I think that we should only teach evidence-supported science to students and allow them to decide for themselves if they accept that evidence, completely reject it, or develop their own ideas and theories based on that evidence and/or their own beliefs.
Click to expand...

In science class? Evolution. Period.

Want to here other theories? Take a class in Comparative Religion.
 
marduc said:
we will never have a "complete" chain because not every critter that lives becomes a fossil, and for every link found there are two new ones missing, I am not going to fall for your predictable and all too common fools errand
Click to expand...

No, you said we have numerous links and chains. Give me an example of a complete chain between two different species. When you find you can't do that, give me an example of a chain that is only 70% complete. When you find you can't even do that, just give me the best you got. You said there are numerous chains, I'm sure you'll find something convincing.
 
friday said:
What I said Try, that Genesis was written alegorically and evolution over billions of years was possible.
Click to expand...

Well, I am impressed that this was taught in a Sunday School.

But I still don't want Creationism or ID taught in public schools, not in any science classes.
 
tryreading said:
Well, I am impressed that this was taught in a Sunday School.

But I still don't want Creationism or ID taught in public schools, not in any science classes.
Click to expand...

That's fine, I don't want the theory of evolution taught in science class. It is not science. I haven't even pulled out the best argument yet.
 
friday said:
No, you said we have numerous links and chains. Give me an example of a complete chain between two different species. When you find you can't do that, give me an example of a chain that is only 70% complete. When you find you can't even do that, just give me the best you got. You said there are numerous chains, I'm sure you'll find something convincing.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/science-and-technology/80285-evolution-action-real-time.html#post1058958908

you added the "complete" qualifications. the only way we would have this is if we had every single generation
 
friday said:
That's fine, I don't want the theory of evolution taught in science class. It is not science. I haven't even pulled out the best argument yet.
Click to expand...

why are you holding out when every argument you have had so far is so shaky?
 
marduc said:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/science-and-technology/80285-evolution-action-real-time.html#post1058958908

you added the "complete" qualifications. the only way we would have this is if we had every single generation
Click to expand...

Sorry, artist renditions don't impress me. I've been to the Addis Ababa, Ethiopia national museum where Lucy's bone fragments lie. I've seen the elaborate animals they construct around an inch of bone fragment. Not impressed. Do you have any actual pictures of the fossils? Or just pretty drawings?
 
friday said:
No, you said we have numerous links and chains. Give me an example of a complete chain between two different species. When you find you can't do that, give me an example of a chain that is only 70% complete. When you find you can't even do that, just give me the best you got. You said there are numerous chains, I'm sure you'll find something convincing.
Click to expand...
http://www.montana.edu/paleoecology/Theriotetal_Paleobiol_2006.pdf Ring species - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
friday said:
Sorry, artist renditions don't impress me. I've been to the Addis Ababa, Ethiopia national museum where Lucy's bone fragments lie. I've seen the elaborate animals they construct around an inch of bone fragment. Not impressed. Do you have any actual pictures of the fossils? Or just pretty drawings?
Click to expand...

you can play your dishonest goal post moving game with another sucker.
 
friday said:
No, you said we have numerous links and chains. Give me an example of a complete chain between two different species. When you find you can't do that, give me an example of a chain that is only 70% complete. When you find you can't even do that, just give me the best you got. You said there are numerous chains, I'm sure you'll find something convincing.
Click to expand...

Its just not necessary scientifically to find a complete chain. Evidence is evidence. We have never seen a quark, but there's a lot of evidence that they exist.
 
friday said:
That's fine, I don't want the theory of evolution taught in science class. It is not science. I haven't even pulled out the best argument yet.
Click to expand...

Good luck, hoss. But its going to stay in science class, of course.
 
friday said:
Sorry, artist renditions don't impress me. I've been to the Addis Ababa, Ethiopia national museum where Lucy's bone fragments lie. I've seen the elaborate animals they construct around an inch of bone fragment. Not impressed. Do you have any actual pictures of the fossils? Or just pretty drawings?
Click to expand...
They know she walked upright because they have the hip. An artist's impression of a prehistoric animal is necessarily somewhat speculative. There are more examples of Lucy's species than just her.

EDIT: The jaw bone drawings are from actual bones, and the pictures at the bottom are photographs.
 
Last edited:
marduc said:
you can play your dishonest goal post moving game with another sucker.
Click to expand...

I could draw you a picture of Adam and Eve since you are so easily convinced by drawings
 
tryreading said:
Its just not necessary scientifically to find a complete chain. Evidence is evidence. We have never seen a quark, but there's a lot of evidence that they exist.
Click to expand...

I would argue same with God, what's your point?
 
So when Jesus says in Revelation:
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End."
Click to expand...
What does he mean and/or what is he saying?
 
Anarcho-fascist said:
They know she walked upright because they have the hip. An artist's impression of a prehistoric animal is necessarily somewhat speculative. There are more examples of Lucy's species than just her.

EDIT: The jaw bone drawings are from actual bones, and the pictures at the bottom are photographs.
Click to expand...

I've seen the other skulls at the Lucey exhibit firsthand. Most of them are an entire skull fabricated around one fossilized tooth or inch of skull fragment. Like I said, not impressed. I also saw their paintings of zebra/giraffes, hippo/alligators, etc.
 
friday said:
I've seen the other skulls at the Lucey exhibit firsthand. Most of them are an entire skull fabricated around one fossilized tooth or inch of skull fragment. Like I said, not impressed. I also saw their paintings of zebra/giraffes, hippo/alligators, etc.
Click to expand...

Skuze me for buttin' in, but if you don't believe in evolution because you don't approve of the evidence, what DO you believe in where the evidence DOES suit you?
 
Just because I just watched the feline video today because its new, and it and the other are on this exact topic, and informative and generally well done:

Canines:


Felines:


I would hope Friday would watch these, but the videos I am posting will most likely only be watched in full by the so called "choir"
 
MaggieD said:
Skuze me for buttin' in, but if you don't believe in evolution because you don't approve of the evidence, what DO you believe in where the evidence DOES suit you?
Click to expand...

Maggie, what happened on earth anywhere from tens of thousands of years to billions of years ago is purely speculative. However, I would argue that the fossil record represents a more pure form of survival of the fittest than the round peg fit in a square hole version of survival of the fittest incorporated into Darwinism.

Survival of the fittest defeats generational evolution. Evolution would necessarily have to be a very fast process in order for intermediate species to survive.
 
friday said:
I've seen the other skulls at the Lucey exhibit firsthand. Most of them are an entire skull fabricated around one fossilized tooth or inch of skull fragment. Like I said, not impressed. I also saw their paintings of zebra/giraffes, hippo/alligators, etc.
Click to expand...

So what does impress you?
 
friday said:
Maggie, what happened on earth anywhere from tens of thousands of years to billions of years ago is purely speculative. However, I would argue that the fossil record represents a more pure form of survival of the fittest than the round peg fit in a square hole version of survival of the fittest incorporated into Darwinism.

Survival of the fittest defeats generational evolution. Evolution would necessarily have to be a very fast process in order for intermediate species to survive.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, Friday. But I'll ask again: What do you believe in where the evidence does suit you?

I would also add that, imo, survival of the fittest applies to predators v prey.
 
friday said:
I've seen the other skulls at the Lucey exhibit firsthand. Most of them are an entire skull fabricated around one fossilized tooth or inch of skull fragment. Like I said, not impressed. I also saw their paintings of zebra/giraffes, hippo/alligators, etc.
Click to expand...
File:Mrs Ples.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Animals can be identified by their teeth alone. The pictures at the bottom are actual skulls.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom