Recent Comments

1. over 13 years ago on Doonesbury

   No one here has yet identified – though some have postulated – any organism that has developed from one species into another.For macroevolution on the species scale go here: Macroevolution examples and evidenceI think part of what you need to do to get the difference between micro and macro evolution is to look at sympatric and allopatric speciation. What you gave as an example would be sympatric speciation and it will be much rarer because there needs to be some sort of reproductive boundary between the populations which is not geographical (e.g. sexual choice, time dependent)

2. over 13 years ago on Doonesbury

   Here’s a thought – could we discuss evolution and creation without mentioning the Bible? Without the bible generally people don’t have a reason to dispute evolution. Maybe you prefer one of these other anti-evolution positions?Forbidden Archaeology – Michael Cremo (Hare Krishna)Red Earth – White Lies- Vine Deloria (American Indian)

3. over 13 years ago on Doonesbury

   Given that an offspring’s DNA is a mixture of two parents, and given that mistakes can happen when an offspring’s DNA is made, and given that means the offspring’s traits will differ from its parents, which means that some of the offspring of a generation will be better equipped than others to survive long enough to raise their own offspring, the real question becomes: How could evolution not occur???Can one of the anti-science religious fundies answer that?I wouldn’t call myself an anti-science religious fundie but I’ve looked at this argument quite a bit. I think many would suggest that they have no argument with Microevolution which is what you seem to be referring to because that would be the change in gene frequencies. And I think many people accept this. The responding question seems to be "but there aren’t any examples ofMacroevolution"and then you could direct them here: Macroevolution examples and evidenceI hope that saved some people some trouble.

4. over 13 years ago on Doonesbury

   “The Mis Measure of Man.”There was an article in PloS about “The Mis-Measure of Man” recently. The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and BiasAs much as I respect S. J. Gould it looks like he may have been guilty of the same errors as Samuel George Morton.

5. over 13 years ago on Doonesbury

   I absolutely agree with you that creationism and the bible are not bound together. But neither are evolution and atheism or evolution and abiogenesis. where would you place yourself on this scale? Creation Evolution Continuum?

6. over 13 years ago on Doonesbury

   I have a question for those commenter who propose that all surviving land animals were present on a man-made ark:If all surviving land animals were at one time in the same place why is there such a variety of where animals can be found now? Why are marsupials found South-East of Wallace’s Line but placental mammals are found North-West? Is this a result of Noah cruising around and dropping off certain animals in certain places?

7. over 13 years ago on Doonesbury

   Something I think would be useful for this discussion is the Creation/Evolution continuum from the National Center for Science Education:Creation / Evolution Continuum“Many — if not most — Americans think of the creation and evolution controversy as a dichotomy with “creationists” on one side, and “evolutionists” on the other. This assumption all too often leads to the unfortunate conclusion that because creationists are believers in God, that evolutionists must be atheists. The true situation is much more complicated: creationism comes in many forms, and not all of them reject evolution." – From the articleWhen discussing evolution science teachers should take the position of “agnostic evolution”. “The term agnostic was coined by “Darwin’s bulldog”, the nineteenth-century scientist Thomas Henry Huxley, to refer to someone who suspended judgment about the existence of God." – From the same articleThe reason why this position should be the stance taken by educators is that the presence or absence of a creator shouldn’t be the topic of discussion in a science classroom.For those that disagree with my position I’d like to know where you would fall on this scale. I am a high school science teacher and though my personal beliefs would put me as a believer in “Theistic Evolution” I don’t accept that I should force my beliefs on my students.