HUCKABEE-EVOLUTION

Should we teach evolution in our schools? Jim Green, Seguin, TX

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Did
• we
• Evolve?

[Verbotten]

I think this dude is out of touch. Actually scientists as stated below are moving AWAY from theory of evoluiton, since it doesnt make sense.

theres planty of evidense that it doesnt add up.

one of them is indivisibility of a cell. cell can not be simplified , it will stop functioning with lesser components thus it could have not evolved.

Microbiology FTW.

[Gelledir]

Stop lying.

That evolution occurs is a scientific fact, and the Theory of Evolution is one of the strongest theories in science. It is the cornerstone of biology.

[JGREEN56789]

Ditto Gelledir....I continue to marvel at what I call "literal logic"...it is a case where one might be "logical", but absolutely irrational......for instance, God created the Earth in 7-24 hour days (how about 7 eras, millions of years in length?)---but their position is "By God, 24 hours means 24 hours"—and they "logically" build around this to make it "true"---such as concluding that dinosaurs existed at the same time as man---

[JGREEN56789]

I continue to marvel at what I call "literal logic"...it is a case where one might be "logical", but absolutely irrational......for instance, God created the Earth in 7-24 hour days (how about 7 eras, millions of years in length?)---but their position is "By God, 24 hours means 24 hours"—and they "logically" build around this to make it "true"---such as concluding that dinosaurs existed at the same time as man---but what is really scary is that these people voted for Bush-- twice....

[matthewedens]

Mr. Green, I find it interesting that you say "every credible scientist" is headed in the same direction on this topic when in fact the very opposite is the case. Many scientists are headed away from Darwinian evolution because of the improbability and lack of evidence. Unless of course, the only "credible" scientists in your eyes are the ones that agree with Darwin's theory.

[JGREEN56789]

but what is really scary is that these people voted for Bush-- twice....

[JGREN5678]

Thanks for confirming what every informed person has known all along---there are a few Republicans who are informed--but not many....

[TheSeantague]

The Theory of Evolution has stood the test of time better than ANY other scientific theory. Gravity, initially developed by Newton, was completely turned on its head by Einstein, who lived after Darwin. Maxwell didn't publish his work until 1861, while Darwin published his in 1859. The electron wasn't even discovered until 1897. Evolution has survived better than any of these other theories.

[cryofreeze1986]

"does one need basics to prove something? If a court of law have witness and physical evidence that you did the act, do they have to break it down to the fundamentals?"

LOL your reasoning is too far from the topic. Science has rules while jurisdiction has its own rules. In science you have too respect the fundamentals before making a claim for the truth value of a theory is dependent on the fundamentals.

Do you really have some proper science education?

[cryofreeze1986]

"some snails do not have distinct genders."

we are discussing how gender evolved not it's importance. Are snails your only example? well there are other hermaphrodites in this planet.

The real question is how sex evolved? Answer that and use common sense.

[grantorgeir]

does one need basics to prove something? If a court of law have witness and physical evidence that you did the act, do they have to break it down to the fundamentals?

If something has 99,9 percent probability of happening, how can another then say that this is 100% proof that something completely different happened? For example: we have dug out 1000s of fossils and not one of them contradict the time-line. We have not found every fossil. That means it's a 100% fact YET.

[grantorgeir]

some snails do not have distinct genders.

when two individuals have sex, they are both able to be father AND mother after the act. That's an example, you feeble-minded ignorant.

[cryofreeze1986]

"And I had to take 3units of Biology as minor. You know what happened to my student who strongly debated with the prof about evo? He almost get a 5.oo or fail."

I mean, my FELLOW student NOT my student.

[cryofreeze1986]

You called me uneducated so I gave you my educational attainment. The reason why I don't like Evolution is it is an insult to the works of Einstein, Hawking and Bohr. That's why you have to learn first about the fundamentals and I hope you'll have the common sense to see why all their works are like child's plaything in Evolution.

And I had to take 3units of Biology as minor. You know what happened to my student who strongly debated with the prof about evo? He almost get a 5.oo or fail.

[cryofreeze1986]

"...in order to disprove one of science's strongest theories"

Evolution is as weak as Ether Theory. In my experience with theories I know which should be taken seriously and which should not. My advise is learn more about the fundamentals first like atoms and electrical force before accepting ridiculous theories like Evolution.

And I don't know who that Kent Hovind is.

[Gelledir]

Don't boast university education if it's not even in the corresponding field. You attempt to disprove a scientific fact using childish argument from ignorance; you fail to demonstrate even basic understanding of the issue.