Turkey stops teaching evolution in high schools

ViaCrucis · Jun 25, 2017

mindlight said:
Adnan Oktar has been quite critical of Erdogan recently.

Yes, though I don't think that excludes Oktar's influence in Turkish popular culture, and Oktar's relationship to Erdogan going back to when he was mayor of Istanbul.

Also he is completely deluded about Turkish nationalism, holocaust denial, Israel etc...

I don't think there's any doubt that Oktar is a dangerous nutjob.

-CryptoLutheran

Smidlee · Jun 25, 2017

Tanj said:
Turkey to stop teaching evolution in high school - CNN.com

Fundamentalists have a lot in common, regardless of which God they believe in.

There are evolution fundamentalists who are just as dogmatic of their beliefs as anyone else. They used the courts to keep anything that goes against their dogma to be kept out of schools.

That Guy 11200 · Jun 25, 2017

JackRT said:
The fossil record shows macro evolution quite clearly.

As well as DNA and phylogenetics.

bhsmte · Jun 25, 2017

Religious fundies are dug in deep and feel threatened. No surprise here.

LinguaIgnota · Jun 25, 2017

For some strange reason, I tend to value the opinions of trained biologists, who have themselves reviewed the evidence and work with evolutionary models on a daily basis (it turns out that actual results are achieved when utilizing the theory of evolution by natural selection), higher than that of religious zealots.

Smidlee · Jun 25, 2017

I'd rather put my faith in the Biologist of biologists who created all biologists including their mind. I don't have to blindly accept the belief of the biologists who never questions the evolution fairy tale in order to accept their knowledge of biology. It's the same I can accept an atheist as one of the best doctors to see without accepting his worldview.
Evolutionist tries to claim we see evolution every day yet we know very well the evolution in question is never seen. I give you an example.

Ana the Ist · Jun 26, 2017

Aryeh Jay said:
The fossils from the flood 4500 years ago, right?

*gets pear out of box and ready…*

You know, the torture devices of the middle ages are somewhat ingenious...pear being one of them...but often overlooked are the far more common positional torture methods. They had one where your hands were chained behind your back to a wall at such a height that you couldn't properly stand...nor comfortably sit. In this way, you were left in this awkward half crouch that would leave you completely exhausted in hours and in agonizing pain after days....and it's one of the milder ones.

Jimmy D · Jun 26, 2017

mindlight said:
All Christians and all Muslims believe that God is the Creator. That is not a fundamentalist conviction but it is a neglected teaching of the Western Christian church. Macro-Evolution is a controversial theory and is out of scope of true and testable science. It is an analogous rationalisation based on things that can be observed and tested.

Or can you provide the example of the repeatable experiment that demonstrates macroevolution is true?

Well, there goes 200 years worth of scientific research, observation and testing, it was all just an analogous rationalisation after all. Stupid scientists. :oldthumbsup:

AirPo · Jun 26, 2017

mindlight said:
All Christians and all Muslims believe that God is the Creator. That is not a fundamentalist conviction but it is a neglected teaching of the Western Christian church. Macro-Evolution is a controversial theory and is out of scope of true and testable science. It is an analogous rationalisation based on things that can be observed and tested.

Or can you provide the example of the repeatable experiment that demonstrates macroevolution is true?

Yeah. Take a sample of chimp dna and a sample of human dna. Compare them. If macroevolution is true, we should see statistically consistent similarities. hence, look for randomness in the similarities.

AirPo · Jun 26, 2017

mindlight said:
Micro level adaptations can be observed in nature. It is an analogous rationalisation to posit the broader theory of macro-evolution from those observations though. So the theory is controversial

That's only true if you make up non scientific definitions for the words microevolution and macroeveolution. Macroeveolution has been observed in nature.

mindlight · Jun 26, 2017

AirPo said:
Yeah. Take a sample of chimp dna and a sample of human dna. Compare them. If macroevolution is true, we should see statistically consistent similarities. hence, look for randomness in the similarities.

No cause the differences make all the difference. All those similarities prove is a common designer who solved similar problems in chimps and humans.

mindlight · Jun 26, 2017

AirPo said:
That's only true if you make up non scientific definitions for the words microevolution and macroeveolution. Macroeveolution has been observed in nature.

Since timescales of millions of years are posited for macroevolution. No that is absolute rubbish. No one has observed macroevolution in nature. Also adaptations to environments and even differentiations within a species in response to changing circumstances merely prove the strength and flexibility of the Designers code. They do not show ape like ancestors evolving into human beings.

mindlight · Jun 26, 2017

Jimmy D said:
Well, there goes 200 years worth of scientific research, observation and testing, it was all just an analogous rationalisation after all. Stupid scientists.

I am not being critical of true science. When you grasp that then take a look at evolution and ask yourself if controlled repeatable experiments can demonstrate macro evolution and show us some predictions which prove that.

AirPo · Jun 26, 2017

mindlight said:
No cause the differences make all the difference. All those similarities prove is a common designer who solved similar problems in chimps and humans.

No they don't. And experiments are not meant to prove anything.

AirPo · Jun 26, 2017

mindlight said:
Since timescales of millions of years are posited for macroevolution. No that is absolute rubbish. No one has observed macroevolution in nature. Also adaptations to environments and even differentiations within a species in response to changing circumstances merely prove the strength and flexibility of the Designers code. They do not show ape like ancestors evolving into human beings.

Not true. Macroevolution, i.e. speciation, has been observed in nature.

mindlight · Jun 26, 2017

AirPo said:
No they don't. And experiments are not meant to prove anything.

There was I thinking that scientists were interested in a truthful reading of the book of nature.

So there is no difference between the capacity for speech, tool making and ability to learn between humans and apes?! The differences in their DNA have nothing to do with the paucity of ape made pyramids, spaceships and iphones!? The difference makes all the difference which is why they are the ones in cages being thrown bananas by amused tourists

mindlight · Jun 26, 2017

AirPo said:
Not true. Macroevolution, i.e. speciation, has been observed in nature.

The bible starts with a bigger definition of type ( species) than has been the custom in modern science. So for instance 41 different species of sparrow have been discovered but biblically they are all just sparrows. The broader idea of type allows for differentiation by time and circumstance ( the observable process you call evolution or even speciation ) but sparrows never evolve into swans or eagles is the point.

KWCrazy · Jun 26, 2017

JackRT said:
The fossil record shows macro evolution quite clearly.

No it doesn't.
It shows animals that lived and died with no link to ancestry.
Arranging them to attempt to show progression is a manipulation of data.

KWCrazy · Jun 26, 2017

JackRT said:
A Gallup poll in 1991 indicates that only about 5% of scientists in the USA have a problem with the ToE. If we narrow the field to just the earth and life scientists the number drops to 0.15%. If we include scientists world wide it drops to less than 0.1%.

Citation needed.
Also, we need to know the definition used. If you ask if species adapt over time you're going to have a much different answer than if you ask whether a person believes that all living things, plant and animal, came from one magical cell.

Smidlee · Jun 26, 2017

AirPo said:
Yeah. Take a sample of chimp dna and a sample of human dna. Compare them. If macroevolution is true, we should see statistically consistent similarities. hence, look for randomness in the similarities.

This is only if the religious belief, the principle of continuity is true. DNA-R-US doesn't seem to be true as the cell itself contains a lot of information. The fact that chimps DNA is very similar with man shows that the majors differences are not due to DNA.

Turkey stops teaching evolution in high schools

Confessional Lutheran

Veteran

Newbie

Attachments

Newbie

Newbie

Veteran

Aggressively serene!

Well-Known Member

with a Touch of Grey

with a Touch of Grey

See in the dark

See in the dark

See in the dark

with a Touch of Grey

with a Touch of Grey

See in the dark

See in the dark

Newbie

Newbie

Veteran

Similar threads