Slashdot Mirror
Alabama Will Require Students To Learn About Evolution, Climate Change
An anonymous reader writes: For the first time, public school students in Alabama will be required to understand evolution, thanks to new curriculum rules behind implemented next year. Teachers in the state will also be required to discuss climate change. Not only did the 40-person, Republican-controlled Board of Education pass the standards unanimously, but nobody even spoke out against them at a board meeting. The new rules say, "The theory of evolution has a role in explaining unity and diversity of life on earth. This theory is substantiated with much direct and indirect evidence. Therefore, this course of study requires our students to understand the principles of the theory of evolution from the perspective of established scientific knowledge. The committee recognizes and appreciates the diverse views associated with the theory of evolution."
So long as they're aware that it is only a theory.
Oh my GOD, hell has finally frozen over.
Intelligent and far seeing Republicans. Wow they're going to torn to shreds by the Bible Belt Brigade.
Small glimmer of hope
And they probably will focus more on that one word than actual truth. "It's only a theory"...
Sorry. Live in the South, don't trust them :(
Did Hell freeze over?
there's a god after all?
I'm not from that state, but I'd like to put my two cents in.
Teaching evolution shouldn't be an issue. I think the standard is getting permission, and if a student/parent isn't comfortable, they don't have to be in the class at the time. Unless they're making it involuntary with no opt-out.
The thing about science is that things we have can always change. Evolutionary Theory is the best we have right now.
As for climate change, that's a bit more controversial. There's the issue of whether it's man-made or not, or perhaps in part. As for action, I think we should fight pollution for it's own sake. http://www.gocomics.com/joelpett/2009/12/13/ helps sum up my stance more or less.
Relevant from the article...
I don't know what they mean by, "teachers will be required to address climate change". If it's a discussion, that's fine. If they teach that it's 100% caused by humans, that's a problem. They need to talk about all viewpoints along with the scientific data that indicates a changing climate.
The topic of whether it's human-caused or not is so controversial that even mentioning this will probably get my post modded down.
An Alabama republican is a progressive.
Search YouTube for Democrat Alvin Holmes' thoughts on beer.
This is about the town of Alabama, Massachusetts.
...for something that not only should have been in place already, but is tepid in comparison to how science is taught almost everywhere else around the world.
That's how much the religious zealots have been able to twist the narrative in their favor, to the point where every civilized person breathes a sigh a relief when they AREN'T shoving their creationist mythologies in students' faces and indoctrinating them with dogma. Are we supposed to congratulate Alabama for not being backwards fundamentalists? That's the intellectual equivalent of giving them a medal for promising not to lynch any more black people.
I read the summary and it didn't say anything about unseasonably cold weather - much less sub-freezing temperatures - in Alabama.
Don't celebrate too much. The lessons will be titled "How Jebus used evolution to make humankind smart enough to vote Republican."
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
(Using the word 'faith' very loosely here, because after all it's a meme)
;-)
Good to hear on a Monday morning. Bonus points: Alabama! Can we get the rest of the southern states on board next?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
I say drop the origin of life topic all together from public education.
It's the sound of a fundamentalist's head exploding. If you missed it, don't worry. There will be more to follow!
THANK GOD!
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
Only in America is it newsworthy that there's a potential that students might actually be taught science in school.
For the baffled foreigners reading this: I attended a public school in the US, and read portions of the Bible as part of my English class (Genesis, because it is as commonly referenced as the Greek myths we also read) and my World Religions class. However, in many places (not where I went), Genesis is also presented in Biology classrooms as an authoritative source. US school students have plenty of exposure to the Bible already, but there's a fight over giving them even more exposure, and in a very different context.
Also, despite what you may have heard, prayer is permitted in US public schools. Any student could (and did) pray on their own time as long as it did not disrupt school or create the appearance that the school endorsed their particular beliefs. The fight here is over the right for public schools to endorse particular religions (particularly Christianity), and for students to proselytize and disrupt school.
I knew stepping though that portal was risky but I kind of like this Alabama filled with science education and NASA engineers.
Back in my dimension, we are mainly focused on where to put our 10 commandment monument and the evils of an education lottery.
So now you have to move from Kansas to Alabama to receive a sound scientific education. What the hell is going on in this country?
What other realistic options are there?
:S
Climate Change you have two:
1) The Republican Alternative - I'm ignorant and slightly inbred / retarded so I just say no.
2) There is no other answer.
Evolution
1) The Religious Argument ( Christian Version ) - God invented humanity to punish, murder, kill, rape and enslave it and when it came time to forgive humanity, he sent himself as his son to earth, to be abused, tortured and killed, to forgive himself, from himself, because of himself in the greatest act of sadomasochistic grandstanding ever.
2) The ID Argument - The Designer NOT God designed everything and left no proof ( except that it's rebadged creationism!)
3) There is no other argument!
So I'm glad schools are teaching fact, I guess it's about time
If I had to guess, some mega business threatened to leave the state unless they started producing a workforce with some semblance of education. But that's just a guess - some monied interest was twisting arms, almost certainly.
I am from Alabama and they taught Evolution 20 years ago when I was in school....
Don't be too quick to celebrate. Only religious people smart enough to realize that evolution contradicts their holy book are against evolution. Maybe this passed because Alabama's religious people are too dumb to see the problem.
.
Of course, there's still this from TFA:
...Textbooks used in Alabama science classes have carried a disclaimer sticker for years stating that evolution is a "controversial theory," not fact, and the new course of study doesn't change the warnings, which were advocated by Christian conservatives....
rewarding luddite states with accolade when they comply with something widely understood and accepted is not remarkable, but it certainly seems to be en-vogue. The real question to ask is what changed? For the uninitiated outside of the US, states like Georgia, Alabama, Missouri, and Florida all boast a distinctly anti-scientific approach to education and public policy. Everything from contraception to carbon emissions, although widely understood, are suddenly a furious haze of confusion and rhetoric when approached by these states. the federal government largely permits the antebellum myred south to engage in wackiness like abstinence only education and bans on the ban on fracking, so theres no external pressure to suddenly decide policy on things like transvaginal ultrasound are morally reprehensible.
but in this case what changed? did the Alabama legislature finally concede to the fear that their children would be laughed out of college and postsecondary educations outside the field of philosophy and religion? or was is pressure from tech and science industries starved for talent and no longer willing to tolerate a legislature that willfully stupefies the state at its most fundamental level? what caused this state to set aside the purile jackassery of sticker disclaimers and alternate theories for a season and consider for a moment the possibility there is no controversy?
Good people go to bed earlier.
The board of education is taking a middle course. Their statement says, " "The theory of evolution has a role in explaining unity and diversity of life on earth. This theory is substantiated with much direct and indirect evidence."
By saying the theory has a role, they are saying it is true, but implying that there may also be other factors involved, in particular divine intervention. From what what I understand, this is the position of the Catholic church.
There is another controversy involved here, namely about the age of the universe and the Earth. A significant proportion of Americans hold the Biblical-literalist view that it is only 6,600 years old, with humans and animals created in their present form from the beginning. By supporting Darwin's theory of evolution, they are by implication affirming the conventional view the universe and the Earth were created billions of years ago.
See subject: That all said & aside, God created life that evolves to survive different conditions (since God IS perfect).
* Yes, I believe in/worship God...
APK
P.S.=> It only makes sense, given the initial premise that most all believers in faiths worshipping an almighty God (something that powerful must have created the space-time continuum we live in) would hold I'd think... apk
It's just a theory....like the Theory of Gravity or Electronic Theory. And we all know how unreliable and far-fetched those kooky theories are!
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I'd like to be the first to welcome Alabama to the 20th Century.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Bravo. Alabama is one of the GOP's mystic strongholds where much of the population sounds like Mullahs in Afghanistan. Changing their education system to teach evolution is a wise move.
You're an idiot. Evolution has been proven if you would only read a little)
FTFY
Also, that could be considered a dangling modifer. What little thing should be read? A little rock? A little prince?
I don't see how teaching children CAGW is any different than teaching creationism. For one, none of their research has been elevated to theory. Second, none of their prediction models have ever been verified which is an essential part of the scientific method. And last, not a single long term climate prediction has ever come to pass.
When states like Texas are criticized, they have at least been able to say they are better than Alabama and Mississippi. I guess we are not down to Mississippi.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Teaching evolution shouldn't be an issue. I think the standard is getting permission, and if a student/parent isn't comfortable, they don't have to be in the class at the time. Unless they're making it involuntary with no opt-out.
Standard should be it gets taught and if the student/parent is uncomfortable with evidence backed science then they can home school their child. I really have no patience for making special accommodations for people's superstitions. I think Newton's flaming laser sword should apply here.
As for climate change, that's a bit more controversial. There's the issue of whether it's man-made or not, or perhaps in part.
It's only controversial in the minds of those who would prefer it not be true regardless of what the evidence actually shows. Every credible piece of evidence appears to support the thesis that activities of mankind are having substantial and measurable effects. Whether mankind is responsible for 100% or some amount less kind of misses the point. The point is that we appear to be responsible for FAR more than 0% of the recent rise in temperatures and other climatic effects.
I don't know what they mean by, "teachers will be required to address climate change". If it's a discussion, that's fine. If they teach that it's 100% caused by humans, that's a problem. They need to talk about all viewpoints along with the scientific data that indicates a changing climate.
If the evidence shows that it is human caused then that is what should be taught. So far it appears the evidence overwhelmingly supports the thesis that human activity is the source of much of the recent rise in global temperatures and other climatic changes. Personal opinion on the matter is irrelevant. Science doesn't work on opinion and there are not two sides to every argument. You don't study viewpoints that are unsupported by data.
It must be time to die
... this wouldn't have happened otherwise.
Did I die and go to heaven?
are so stupid. So stupid.
To keep things nice and germ free in hospitals, for the last 50 years we've been wiping everything down with Lysol. And for a good 30 to 35 years, that worked pretty well. Then, about 20 or so years ago, it started getting harder to kill everything with Lysol.
Bacteria developed which was Lysol-resistant. Now, how do you suppose that happened? Unicorn-farts?
The irony is that, hospitals, once the cleanest places in the world, are now one of the most bacteria-ridden despite an on-going war to sterilize as much as possible.
Would you like to propose some alternate theory that doesn't utilize evolution to explain what's happening right in front of your eyes? And I mean one that doesn't involve any magic men in the sky who are everywhere and invisible?
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Go learn about what the main factors for climate change are. HINT, humans are on the bottom of the totem poll in terms of change factors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change
Popular science is so often "WRONG".
This is the same state described here, right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Amazing! I'm wondering if they added something to the drinking water .. or took something away!
No.. the chapter will be titled "Evolution and Global warming, the Democratic plot to have homosexuals take over America."
Silence is a state of mime.
I mean, if they are so afraid of not having god be the center of all schooling, can't you get away with saying that Two Plus Two Equals Five 'Cause God?
I mean, if you can't teach science at all because "god"; then how do you teach anything else. Is History class all about how God created the heavens and the earth and the planet is 6000 years old?
It seems to me that you can use that as the basic answer to anything ; "because God". And then scare teachers into accepting that because they don't want to lose their jobs.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
The problem with this is that when you break it down, there are many possible positions on taxation.
For example, I consider myself mostly conservative when it comes to taxation - I believe that the budget needs to be balanced(on average), taxes simplified, etc... I support a 'flat' tax with a large deductible. As such, I found the long-term capital gains tax reduction without limits to be horrible - amounting to a regressive tax system. I feel better now that it's 20%, but it's still half of what it should be(39.6% for the highest tax bracket).
I'd prefer something like you getting a $10k/year deduction for investment income, long term or not, in order to encourage savings, emergency funds, etc...
I don't read AC A human right
For the first time, public school students in Alabama will be required to understand evolution
They'll be required to hear about it. Whether they understand it or not is an entirely different matter.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
The state is still a hell-hole of stupidity, ignorance and illiteracy. Just get on Craigslist and look at how people write their ads. They can't spell anything correctly; it's quite literally:
"Fer Sale; 1981 Chexy Camero, just fixed the breaks, run good now, 383 small block, edelbrock heads % headers, swaped in truck axle aded lift kit. New Triers. Sum rust.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
See subject - However: I was trying to convey that IF you believe in God, a perfect almighty God?
Then you'd logically therefore HAVE to conclude that God would create an adaptable species that EVOLVES to meet changing conditions... Since God is perfect & would have foreseen this happening & created adaptable evolving species (which we DO have, even germs show us this adapting to say, penicillin treatments vs. STD/VD etc.)
* Whether you believe or not is up to you. That above's the point/argument I'd have made to congregations of "creationists" to help them "think it out", from THEIR terms & point-of-view is all...
APK
P.S.=> I do hold that God did create an evolving form of life on earth in most ALL things, IF things change too much, that life adapts until they're "perfect" for their role in nature (like Sharks, haven't had to change in MILLIONS of years afaik, & are therefore 'perfect' for their environs as the hunters of the seas for example)... apk
Only roughly 100 years of science to catch up. Good job, US!
Learning about "climate change" Unless you live in California, Florida, gulf coast etc... Here in the midwest, we have 4 climate changes Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter.
On a side note, what will be call our coming self-directed evolution?
The problem is that Creationist then think, well since the exact mechanism isn't known, then it's just a guess and therefore, a God created us.
Fire up the lawsuits against the school board!vfor teaching Evolution!
Now, if only Creationists would be as skeptical about their myths and beliefs.
And if they actually read some history of the Bible and their beliefs, they would see that much of it was made up by people. The historians have the evidence that God is a fiction.
It seems the political climate is...
*Sunglasses*
Evolving.
YEEAAHH!!!!
Nope, US and global companies were using Alabama's educational enshrinement of the teaching of intelligent design as a reason to pick other states in which to relocate. So, it was about money, which totally fits with the GOP's plutocratic agenda.
Considering that every time I see anything in the news or media it's Caitlyn Jenner this, somebody-famous-came-out that, then yes I might just believe it if someone were to make a good argument that gays were taking over the country and/or the culture. They're only about 3% of the population!
Nobody is talking about "kill all the zygotes" except you, you logic-impaired . The same chain of so-called "logic" you use there could equally be applied to men's sperm or women's ova; destroy all of them and you won't have any more children either. Yet, mysteriously enough, nobody seems to be calling denunciations down on every girl who ever has her period (wasting an ovum, unfertilized) or every boy who ever has a nocturnal emission (or "wet dream").
Yeah, try again. This time, consider actually thinking a little bit first.
Oh, and yes, we would continue to have oak trees; they live a long time, and they produce acorns many, many times. You'd have to destroy them all *continuously* for the entire fertile lifetime of all the currently-living trees. You could, of course, kill off all the oak trees *much* faster by eliminating all the *water* in the world... but that doesn't mean that water is an oak tree either.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
On why Republicans aren't anti-science. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
You are infringing on Ann Coulter's copyrighted ideas.
Congratulations for entering the late 19th century!
Do you have a citation for your claim that they understood what they were voting on? My guess is that since Republicans are so stupid, IQ just below mental retardation according to most studies, that their kind is unable to comprehend what they were voting on. You just know they hate science and want to murder people that teach evolution as their xian religion demands. They are demanded to kill. That is why they own so many guns. To kill as their xianism requires. This is more proof that they honor ignorance.
Most I see ITT dont understand science at all it seems. Lots of people here holding onto science as truth, fact, and so on in the same way those moronic theists do.
They need to say unto themselves: Science is a process of discovering what is most likely true. Scientific knowledge is what we believe is true based on the evidence in record and our understanding of it. Science is not, and does not, claim to be truth. In order to have truth you must have ALL the evidence in records and a complete understanding of it; We do not have this, on any subject. We only have 'what is good enough to say this might be true'.
We have competing theories in quantum physics that all have evidence behind them. Do this brainless fucks think all these theories are thought to be true and absolute?
Once someone says something is absolute you know they are no longer using logic and have not considered the whole swarm of things that could be at work. They have shown themselves to be the same as the dogmatic shits they rail against.
Republican politicians do not just have to think about the will of the voter. They have to think about the will of the Republican base, because voter appeal won't matter if they don't get on the ballot at all. The republican base is not representative of the population in general, and they are always assessing if candidates are sufficiently devout.
Yes, it's true the Republicans have to think about the will of their base. The really unfortunate fact is that the rightist base has proven to be rather biddable, they'll believe whatever they're told as long as the one doing the telling is a well-known Conservative Icon. Think right-wing talk radio hosts, religious leaders, rising-star politicians, etc. and the websites and online communities that support them. From these sources the Conventional Wisdom of modern American Conservatism is distilled and dispersed to the Red State faithful, who are happy to lap it up. Such Conventional Wisdom is never questioned, alas. So if you're a strategist for the Republican party, all you really need to do is buy yourself an established Icon or two to "fire up" the base, in whatever manner you wish to, and... Ta-da! It's done, they'll believe what you want them to, regardless of any contradictory evidence.
It's not a pretty picture, but that's how it works. Science or reality never even enter the picture. It's the only explanation for why these people still believe in things like tax cuts for the rich stimulating the economy and creating jobs. I mean, they've had something like 20 years to see EXACTLY how ineffective such policies truly are, but Conventional Wisdom still says they work, so expect all the Republican candidates to include them in their platforms. It's pathetic.
I had biology class in a small town in Alabama way back in 1967. My teacher was a very religious lady who was in church every time the door was open, but she taught us about evolution and natural selection. For her it was science and she was teaching a science course. Her beliefs were something she left at the door. We all knew, and most of the class agreed with her beliefs. She was tough as nails and it was hard to make an 'A' in her class. I made straight A's.
I also had her for human physiology class. The final exam had only one question. Name the ten systems in the human body, the organs that make up each system, and the functions of those organs. Simple, huh?
In short, good science teachers will teach science. Personally I see no disagreement between science and religion. One tells you how and the other tells you why.
You're gonna tell kids the poles are melting?
What happens when they look at a map and see it's expanding?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technol...
What happens if they go to James Bay which is solid ice now and hear it wasn't 30 years ago, check with NASA and find there's more ice now than before?
http://rs79.vrx.net/opinions/i...
What happens if they look at the south pole?
http://www.nasa.gov/content/go...
When the disconnect between readily available physical evidence and the popular media is this vast you'd hope the educational system would side with science. Odds are these facts aren't in the curriculum (somebody should check).
As you ponder America augering into the ground consider the benefits of being truthful with children. The left bought black science guy and white science guy to brainwash children and Murdoch just bought NatGeo now he's figured it out, reasoning those ads^H^H^Hfacts last 30 years in dentists and doctors offices.
I thought America was all about truth and liberty? Not commercial propaganda and oppression of free thought.
Need Mercedes parts ?
It is very good to see this.
Seriously, I can respect people (e.g. Republicans) holding different views from me ... once they're not complete f***ing morons (evolution/climate change deniers/birthers/etc). Nice to see some non-crazy Republicans for a change ... the crazy ones usually seem to get all the press.
Surely you meant to say, "homosexual Muslim ISIS sleeper agents from Mexico"?
Gotta keep up with the times.
The reason I think being authoritarian is the best approach in certain times is because it objectively is. Let me explain:
I have a close family member who's a cancer survivor. She is a child. She received treatment and she is fine now (more or less).
There are sizable numbers of people who would have not treated her and instead prayed to God. She would have died. That is a fact. What ever else you believe or don't believe that is a fact.
This is not hypothetical. There have been cases where folks with strong religion had their children taken away from them because they choose to "Trust in the Lord".
I know you've got a dozen things to say to my story above about how/why it was OK to be authoritarian in the cases above. But the fact is you're being authoritarian. There is such a thing as an authority. It's possible to be right and it's possible to be wrong.
Then again you might just wash your hands. Sorting out right and wrong is _hard_. It requires real work and real compromises. It's much, much easier to just wash your hands and say "Oh fuck it, I don't want to impose my beliefs". It's especially seductive because it lets you ignore all the real world suffering by telling yourself you'd only make things worse. But that's a half assed cop out that doesn't save any lives.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Have gnu, will travel.
Obviously Carbon Dating is how the Promiscuous Biochemicals find other promiscuous biochemicals who aren't busy that aeon so they can reproduce and create life, which should make the "sex is only for reproduction" crowd quite happy.
You can even ask the Vatican's astronomers about it. Most of them are planetologists (the only one I've met personally is Brother Guy Consolmagno, who works out of Kitt Peak, but there are a few others.) (And that Galileo thing wasn't really about the Earth circling the Sun or vice versa, it was about Galileo being friends with the wrong political crowd, and the folks he supported having annoyed the Pope.)
Evolution is a fact. A natural fact. That means it was created by God, if you're religious.
It was observed, described and can be still be observed just like mountains or rivers.
The ones who studied this fact came up with an explanation, which we commonly call a theory: the theory of Evolution.
There's a theory of electromagnetism, too, and electromagnetism is real.
Theories can be verified, to see if they match the facts. This has been done in real life (through more observations), in labs (by setting up experiments, usually with bacteria and drugs) and in simulations, mathematical experiments where evolution shows up without being planned.
Denying facts is characteristic of crazy people. It's not about religion.
There's practicality to it also. Even if someone utterly disagrees with it, you can't deny that it's important to learn evolution if you want to understand biology and maybe someday get a job working with biology (say as a doctor). Denying evolution is seriously going to put a student at a competitive disadvantage. So play some games and treat it like Newtonian physics; we know it's not fully correct but we learn it because we've got to in order to deal with the world and get through the classes, and you need to know it to learn relativistic and quantum physics, and it's a great approximation.
And also don't forget that both Republican and Democratic parties are conglomerates of strange bedfellows. There is the Republican wing that is all about economics and is pro-business, and the wing that is pro-American exceptionalism, and so forth. Those wings, especially in Alabama, are probably tired of being typecast as uneducated people who can't compete in the world. (don't forget the big push for science during the cold war, so we could stay ahead of the godless commies)
Evolution is merely theory, but the God speculation doesn't even rise to the level of hypothesis let alone theory.
Let me guess... a fish grew lungs, sprouted arms and legs, walked into the board meeting, and bitch-slapped them all until they acknowledged evolution? And climate change... my guess is one of them spontaneously burst into flames while walking from his car to the board meeting, and the others realized it was too hot out to live in Alabama anymore, and maybe, just maybe... there MIGHT be a problem.
about alabama public education...
i guess it's time to /s/alabama/texas/
Some say that creationism is true, others know that it is complete and utter bollocks.
Since we ALREADY have plenty of godbotherers on the telly claiming creationism is true, how about we teach the controversy and schools tell kids that creationism is a load of made-up bollocks.
Likewise, we have televangelists claiming that their god is the one true one, how about we teach our kids the other side, that religion is all bullshit, at our schools, the only place they'll hear it.
We DO want to teach both sides, don't we?
Prove that a matrix or brain-in-a-jar thing leading to this observation set is possible.
There's no law against a teapot orbiting jupiter. Doesn't mean there IS one.
Stop reading and watching LGBT media, then, as those are the only places which could cause the "problem" you are experiencing. Or just grow up. Either would work, really.
See subject: "... & yea though I walk thru the valley of /. I shall fear no trolls - for thou art with me..." - Psalms 23:4 (sort of)
* :)
APK
P.S.=> ... And, "there ya go"... apk
The corporate overlords are tired of idiots in their factories.
How much do you wanna bet that Alabama teacher's try and pull a Kim Davis? Muh Gawwwwwwd...
You gotta watch the various channels of the God-crazy loonies on YouTube now, I bet they'll go apeshit over this!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Spontaneous gene mutations made the different life forms. No theory is needed for that, just observation. Less than one percent of the existing life forms exist because of "survival of the fittest".
Some of the strongest evidence for evolution wasn't available back when Darwin was around, which is looking at how genetics shows relationships between current life forms (whether animals, plants, fungi, whatever.) Some of it's complicated stuff, like bits of viruses embedded in "junk DNA", or genes for dealing with problems that aren't as common today (for instance, allergies as defense against parasites.) And there's fun stuff like mutations that let some people digest milk as adults, which have evolved in a couple of places around the world, probably about 5000 years ago.
And then there are things like Sickle Cell Anemia, where having one copy of the gene protects you from malaria but doesn't make you sick, and two copies mean you're likely to get sick, but from an evolutionary standpoint, having half your kids not die from malaria is more valuable than having 1/4 of your kids die from sickle-cell, so the gene persists. It's one of those reminders about why "survival of the fittest" isn't a really useful term.
Is a 16 year old kid capable of denying treatment? What about 13? 10? 7? Where do you draw the line, especially when it's a completely treatable illness that kills if left untreated?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It is both a theory and a fact.
That is just about the dumbest thing I have ever heard - on Slashdot, no less. This is a website for those interested in science. It is expected that you understand what a theory is.
I'm not. Evolution is a fact. In so far that science can say anything is a fact, evolution is a fact.
When science uses that word to describe a process, it's not saying that description is a "best guess". It's not a guess. It's a complex description of how things work, which, to the best of our understanding, is a fact.
Can certain parts of that understanding change? Of course. But the general statement "Species evolved from previous species over time" is not a guess. It's a fact.
Well, when you put it that way, it makes me realize that you are just as ignorant as any bible-thumping Christian I've ever seen.
Hmmpf - and I thought this was a website for the educated.
Its good that a scientific fact such as evolution is learned at school. Evolution is a scientific fact. There is no scientist that disagrees with it. The only people who disagree with it are radical religious people because it contradicts with their religion. Climate change is something totally different. That is if with that they mean man made global warming. Because climate change is normal, it has always been changing (ice ages, warm periods). Whether the earth is heating upp is up to debate. Scientists disagree about this. The last 15 years it has not gotten any warmer. Even among scientists who believe that there is a warming they disagree in the cause. Whether its natural or there is a human cause. Of those that believe there is a human factor they disagree how big the human factor is. From slightly helping a natural phenomenon to causing in. Global warming believers ignore natural factors such as the activity of the sun. Or other facts. Facts are that humans produce less then 4% of all CO2. CO2 has never driven climate in the past. In fact, information from ice drills proved that there was a link between climate and CO2 but its the other way around. When the temperature rises CO2 rises, when the temperature drops CO2 levels drop. But CO2 lags behind 500 years. This is because oceans let go CO2 when they heat and take it in when they cool down. But they take a very long time to heat or cool.
Depends on what exactly is being said.
Just like Gravity is a fact, and generally speaking "what goes up, must come down" is a fact. However once you get into some of the finer details it may be a bit more complicated than that and more theoretical. It is a big topic.
Evolution is a fact (but also a big topic), but again, once you get into some really specific areas it is more of a theory. However I'm pretty confident whatever overview evolution is given in grade school should be considered fact, not theory. Once the little buggers go to higher education, and start looking at the limits of our understanding of evolution, then they can call it theory. However in order to do that they need a basic understanding of the known facts...
Step 1: Get Donald Trump elected as President
Step 2: ???
Step 3: PROFIT!!!