Explore Evolution - A new textbook standard for public schools

[Oallos1]

In the news today:

Deleting a gene removes a limit to learning and memory in mice. RGS14 appears to hold mice back mentally, John Hepler, PhD, professor of pharmacology at Emory University School of Medicine, says he and his colleagues have been jokingly calling it the "Homer Simpson gene." RGS14 is also found in humans.

Anyone care to speculate on the implication this has for evolution theory...?

[FiverBeyond]

Ho boy.

Creationism -->

'scientific' Creationism -->

Creation Science -->

Intelligent Design -->

"Teach the Controversy" -->

"strengths and weaknesses"

I hope people don't fall for this kind of presentation. This book is distinctly non-scientific and anti-evolution. It uses recycled Creationist arguments, and deliberately misrepresents the most important findings and research in the past fifty years of the neo-Darwinian synthesis.

[Goohuman]

Guys guys. .. The important thing is that there is a textbook being released that actually addresses the pro and con of evolution rather than the one sided arguments we have had for ages now. This is a good thing.

Can we agree on that?

[iNova707]

Sad thing is that I know the authors :( They're pretty much biased. I would like authors that are actually not christians, muslims...I could accept that if there were atheist, agnostic and even some believers...but not the Discovery institute :( Again, I'm not anti religious...I'm just against those anti-evolutionist just because of a book written 1800 years before the word "science" appeared, said that God created it and that's it... :( I don't know if you're getting my point...

[iNova707]

correction #13 & #2

[DarwinsAMonkeyInHell]

Thanks for the info =D

[Goohuman]

Excellent idea!

[highwind8124]

If Christians want to teach their kids creationism, then they can buy this textbook and have the kids read them at home.

I have never seen any character in the New Testament appeal to Caesar for help in their evangelism, to pass laws that evangelize their beliefs.

I don't know why Christians have gone from the gentle knock on the door we see Jesus model to making it mandatory for kids to learn something in schools, except that they don't rely on the Spirit but the state.

[1954phyllis]

@highwind8124 Why should kids be taught creationism at home? There's something very unfair about that . I believe that if the Bible shouldn't be taught in schools neither should evolution since it also is a religion. Remember separation of church and state. I really wish that parents that are Christians with school age children could afford to send their children to Christian schools or home school them. I believe that the Bible should be taught in schools again.

[highwind8124]

@1954phyllis

"neither should evolution"

I agree that some of the curriculum is needless and has the sole intent of trying to disprove creationism.

I think the majority of Christians would be okay with allowing students to learn Darwin's theory of natural selection, and how it's the mechanism behind speciation/breeding. That doesn't mean creationism is stated as false since Christians accept that dogs can be bred and bacteria form new strains.

[highwind8124]

@1954phyllis

Even if evolution is true, and humans did evolve from primates, I don't think there's any career-wise payoff in telling the students. I think the motive of that is pretty clear.

Schools are meant to welcome all students and help them in the work force. They're there because they have to be there, and because they don't have a choice, we need to respect that and provide a secular environment for them.

That's the loving thing to do. Hand this textbook out on your own time.

[1954phyllis]

@highwind8124 Since evolution is really a religion based on alot of untruths it shouldnt be taught in schools.

[highwind8124]

@1954phyllis

Things do evolve, but it doesn't mean that there wasn't a point of creation for kinds. You could actually use that argument in defending how all those pairs of animals fit on the ark - since every species of insect would be huge.

Darwin's model of natural selection is the foundation of the science of developing antibiotics. We want to encourage kids to develop those, and it acknowledging the science behind that does not contradict creationism.

[FillTheirVoid]

@highwind8124

Insects didn't go onto the ark.

[highwind8124]

@1954phyllis

Okay, but if you want the Bible taught in schools - by who? Catholics? Mormons? Jehovah's Witnesses? Calvinists? Armenians?

Jesus didn't say take control of government and force children to learn about him, but to sell all your possessions and give them to the poor, and to go throughout the world and preach.

But this is lazy. You want taxpayers and government and teachers (whether they believe or not) to do the work for you.

What you're proposing is immoral.

[1954phyllis]

@highwind8124 No what I'm saying is that if the Bible isnt taught in schools then evolution shouldnt be either because it also is a religion.

[iNova707]

@1954phyllis do you have graduate education in science or you just saying that because ppl in the church told you it is a religion? please, just take a genetics class. Evolution is not a religion and a lot of christians believe evolution is a fact. If you want to go literalistic on the bible you also have to believe that the earth is flat and is the center of the universe,want the quotes? Im not being offensive btw, im just tired of ppl telling what is and what is not true without taking a class

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 I would like the quotes.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman here: Joshua capt 10 verse 13... the sun stood still....? Science proved it is the earth that moves around the sun. ok heres another 1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.”, Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...”, Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...”, Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.” Unmovable? the earth and the other planets moves around the sun.

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 Okay, I am familiar with those verses, but you said the Bible states the earth is flat and the center of the universe. I don't see anything to support that claim.

You do understand that God can make the sun stop if He wanted to and that Psalms is poetry about God? FYI.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman its rationalization :) If the earth stops, the sun would be look stable in the same place; but since it putted vice verse it says that the sun orbits around the earth, you can't stop the sun since its immovable its in the center. Another thing is yes it says that is flat its says inmovable, in some prophecy books say reaching the ends of the earth...the earth doesn't have "ends" its some what oval..more circular though. :)

[iNova707]

Respond to this video...

Umm yea i know psalms is a poetry and a "prophecy" book. Thats why the whole bible is figurative and not explicit. The bible said "God created the heavens and the earth"...the question is HOW he did it? Well I can say it was the big bang, and a process of evolution. You see where i'm getting at? :)

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 Okay, I getcha. I would avoid rationalizing poetry and restating it as fact, though. Bad logic.

A few years back I would have agreed with you regarding how God created the heavens and earth. Now I know there simply is no way for us to know such a thing. That doesn't and shouldn't stop us from trying. I just have a problem with some scientists that learn a whole lot about one aspect to God's creation and they think they can rationalize God right out of existence, then die themselves.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman yup I get ur point. Still i'm a microbiologist and I study how they change, evolve and works and its relation to our whole environment. But don't worry man, I'm not an atheist, I think the whole universe is something miraculous that we would never understand , but we have to make an effort. If a person wanted to believe in the shape of the earth in the 15th or 16th century he would've been killed. I think that is whats happening today...except the execution part :P

[iNova707]

@Goohuman Scientist don't "believe" in something, they agree what it has been shown to them, however they know that those postulates might change. Evolution is something that it has happened, and there's proof for it, even though people get the wrong idea on how it actually works...there's no such thing as a half horse half dog. Still you can see the change between a wolf and a dog...and its only been 10 thousand years, imagine millions and billions. I don't think Christians should be afraid. :)

[jailer345]

@iNova707 A dog is a wolf. Their genomes are virtually identical. Micro evolution or evolution within a species has occurred and has been observed. However, macro evolution or monkey to man evolution has not occurred and has not been observed. Mutation that has actually added info has never happened and never will. Species are actually devolving. With each successive generation, more and more negative and neutral mutations occur causing genetic entropy. Check out the book Genetic Entropy

[iNova707]

@jailer345 you didn't read the whole comment...10k years not millions. The same way dogs are wolves, humans are primates our genes are identical 98.8% of it. that 2.2% is a fuse of the pair 24 and 23 of the chromosomes. Dude! I know how this works. Micro evolution is the same as Macro evolution. It is observable and it happens EVERY time, just check the changes in their DNA ;)....if it was false then the theory wouldn't exist. Science is not having a war, were not religious motivated ;)

[jailer345]

@iNova707 Are you actually trying to say that humans are to monkeys as wolves are to dogs? That's ridiculous. Wolves and dogs breed seemlessly for multiple generations. Humans and no other animal interbreed. Micro evol. and macro evol are not the same. Micro is suppression or expression of already present genetic info. Macro evol would require addition of new info which has not and will not ever be observed. PS watermelons share rougly %60 the same DNA as humans.

[iNova707]

@jailer345 Whats ur degree man? I mean seriously. Evolution doesn't say we come from monkeys...we come from a common ancestor, EVERYTHING that lives comes from a single common ancestor, that's why there's 60% compatibility with a watermelon. Dude you are telling me...a scientist...that i don't know whats the difference between micro and macro evolution? Please keep your comments to yourself, if you don't dare opening a Biology textbook. Yea; and a talking snake, and an apple is a fact. -_-

[jailer345]

@iNova707 When I studied chemistry in college, I became aware that biology majors where just people who wanted to be real scientists but were not smart enough to do the required math. Don't worry buddy. No one will ask you calculate integrals in your biology class. :p PS don't capitalize biology. It's not a proper noun.

[iNova707]

lol I'm not intelligent? ok. then I'll ask you a question...Do you believe in the talking snake, the fruit and that we all come from incest relationships...also that almost 30 million species fit inside an arc? I assume if you're a creationist, you DO believe in that. If you do so...sorry my man, but a major doesn't say you are more intelligent than another person. Please don't come to me with that crap...the greatest scientists are NOT chemist. And I'm serious about the question I made.

[jailer345]

@iNova707 Hey pal, I'm not the one saying "I am a scientist" every other sentence. It kind of reminds me of when someone isn't telling the truth, so they try to be more convincing by incessantly repeating the lie. The more I think about it the more I think that a, so called, scientist should know that you don't capitlize words like biology, chemistry and the like having been around the words alot. Very interesting.

[iNova707]

@jailer345 its not my fault that I am human and I make errors, besides that english is not my main language ;) Don't get around my question..... DO YOU believe in the talking snake, the fruit and that we come for a long lineage of incest? YES or NO. Is it that hard for you?

[jailer345]

@iNova707 Do you know why having children with your close relative is detrimental? It's due to the fact that relatives have a higher chance of sharing the same mutations. So the offspring of the two relatives will have a higher chance of a mutation being expressed. When Adam and Eve were created by God, their genomes were perfect. It was only after the flood when the gene pool was drastically reduced and there had been many generations of accumulated mutations that incest was outlawed.

[iNova707]

@jailer345 by your own conclusions you say the following: We all come from a long lineage of incest without mutations, around 30 million species fitted in an arc...(including insects...), the expectancy of life were hundreds...not 30s, 50s,etc. Ummm you also think dinosaurs co-existed with humans...Sorry but you just gave me a reason for NOT being in favor of this book :/ hmmm I wonder why there are asians, blackss, white people...without evolving. Oh sorry I forgot Adam and Eve were M&MS.

[jailer345]

@iNova707 People used to live into their 900's when the human genome was nearly perfect, but after many generations of accumulated mutations the fitness of the species decreased which is why the average age drastically decreased after the flood. The genetic information was reduced to 8 people. The mathematical curve for this life expectancy decrease is consistent with those seen in mammals who experience in-breeding. And yes, I believe the Bible and all that it entails.

[iNova707]

@jailer345 Don't worry man I respect your opinion. However, I disagree with you, for many reasons, including the complexity of genes and some other biblical stories. But at least you didn't trash talk like most creationist. I just don't believe in biblical literacy especially Noah's arc and that the world is 6 or 10 thousand years old and that dinosaurs co-existed with humans. :) With that statement you made about biblical literacy, I have no further questions to ask you :)

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 Looks like our chain was broke. Restarting this interesting exchange...

You said you knew the authors and that they are Christian and biased.

I would put to you that everyone believes in something and is biased to some degree.

Can you tell the bias based on the textbook? If not, it is a step up from the blatant bias I've seen in textbooks of late. I'd love to read it.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman The authors are members of the discovery institute or involved :/ Their ideas are more of a "God of the Gaps" believes. For example: "We don't know about about how the big bang was caused" therefore an INTELLIGENT Designer(God) did it :/ Stephen C. Meyer is this type of author. I prefer a book that is not made by only ID thinkers, instead, evolutionist that they admit what problems does the theory has :) John Lennox is a Christian and he believes in evolution, so does many scientist.

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 I would like a book not made only by evolutionist athiests, but we get what we get.

This textbook is unique in that it is being advertised here as NOT being biased. Can you tell me if that is true based on the book? If you knew nothing about the authors, could you tell what they believe by the book?

[iNova707]

@Goohuman I never said evolutionist atheist...because there are believers that believes in evolution(such as me);let me correct you on that first.Also, I said that the Authors...such as Stephen C. Meyer is a very biased guy; just check his videos...the authors are proponents of intelligent design...they claim that ID is a theory...which theres is no evidence at all, when there is evolutionary evidences. And I'll repeat it again; I want autors that actually BELIEVE in evolution and say its errors

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 No correction necessary. I know there are atheists or agnostics with a dislike for religion that work on other texts.You don't have to tell me that.

Yes, I got that you believe the authors are biased, but you are avoiding my question. Is the textbook biased?

Who writes what and how they believe becomes irrelevant as long as you are rational and use logic. If Mr Meyer put bias in the book, it should be easy to find to the critical eye.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman Sure ill answer you the question, look at it this way. (btw this is an answer) Do you think it will be biased a book saying Christianity is of the Devil by a Muslim or hindu author? Same happens here with authors of the discovery institute. And if it WAS an actually textbook...I haven't heard it is on my university or any...I could believe it in Kansas. So yea I know its biased when all authors are not believers in evolution. I think is more rational if evolutionist postulate errors :)

[Goohuman]

@iNova707

Without the book, that is as good as an answer as can be offered. I'm sure you know that it doesn't follow logically, but is a good example of judging a book by it's cover (or author in this case). Thanks.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman there is a huge gap between intelligent designers and evolutionary biologist, that is that when we find a contradiction or something that doesn't fit, we investigate. While ID just say an intelligent designer did it. So yea between research and assumptions I prefer evolutionist...do you get where I'm getting at? All I'm saying is that ID people don't want to investigate, while scientist keep searching and updating. :)

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 Indeed. I find myself less concerned with answers since I've become a christian. I would not be suprised if that is a bit unsettling to non-believing scientists, so that is a valid point.

Evolutionists do depend on the research and must be flexible. I contend an honest ID believer must also do research and be flexible.

It is not enough for some to believe one or the other. They must understand. The more research the better.

[Ironhoist]

@iNova707@jailer345 "Whats ur degree man?"

" Yea; and a talking snake, and an apple is a fact. -_-"

Did you just go from debating to insulting the opposition? Why not just wave the "white flag".

[iNova707]

@Ironhoist bro i'm not insulting...they actually believe that, in the bible the talking snake doesn't have a name. If they don't believe in the talking snake then that's another story and another debate. And I dont see why should I give up...they didnt even have evidence or proof to believe what they say.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman The bible is not a science book srry bro. But that doesn't mean people can believe in God and that stuff. But please don't make look science as a religion, we scientist work hard to know everything we have around us and how it works. We dont want to make ppl atheist, we want ppl to be smart and rational. thats it .-.

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 Smart and rational. That is good. I would add logical as well. God is very logical to me. There is no getting around God in honest logic.

[1954phyllis]

@iNova707 Well since GOD created the heavens, earth and all other forms of creation. I'd say that the Bible is a science book. It seems that the majority of the scientists try to make GOD out to be a liar.

[1954phyllis]

@iNova707 No I don't have an education in science. It amazes me that so called intelligent people could believe in that rubbish evolution. No true Christians do not believe in evolution. To believe in evolution is calling GOD a liar. The Bible does not say that the earth is flat. You are a liar when you say that it does. You can take science and shove it up your nose.

[iNova707]

@1954phyllis hahahahahahahhaha lol Ill stick with the evidence...you stick with the snake in a colorful garden and we all are sons of incests. :P but hey I think the budhist has a theory and they say the bible is a lie...so does muslims :O. Go and stick with your circular reasoning. ;)

[MrSonicAdvance]

@1954phyllis I know religion is easier than atheism, that believing what you're told is easier than thinking, that prayer is easier than actually giving help, but do you have to take the easy way out every time?

You're systematically being milked of your time and money by unscrupulous people. What you call a faith, they see as a job. Okay you've been had, but you don't have to keep wasting time and money on the snake oil salesmen.

The holy "jam tomorrow" never comes.

[highwind8124]

Ideologies shouldn't be competing to try and indoctrinate kids. I don't care whether the teacher wants to say humans evolved from primates or creationists want to use the classroom to explain their arguments.

Schools aren't universities where people can opt to pay for them. Schools are built on trust that the tax dollars will go to strictly prepare kids for the working world. It's not there to prove or disprove a religion, but to provide a neutral as possible environment for all kids.

[1954phyllis]

@highwind8124 Did you know that Moslims are being glorified in textbooks now? What is going on. I guess it doesn't matter what is being taught as long as it isn't the Bible.

[highwind8124]

@1954phyllis

"Glorified"? I have no idea what example you're talking about, but I'm not suggesting a double standard.

[KevZen2000]

I want to read that book. I support evolution,but this book is a great idea.I am not for biblical creationism, because its not science, its a matter of theology, and as long as you are not promoting the supernatural as a valid explanation, then its okay in my book, along with enough empirical evidence to back up your claims.

[1954phyllis]

@KevZen2000 There are alot of scientific facts found in the Bble.