How can we use science to explore the past and debunk conspiracy theories?

[tribdog]

There's been no evolving in the classroom on the subject of evolution in the classroom in fact the classroom's devolving about classroom evolution. It's like Darwin said, "You see one bird you've seen them all."

 

[Entropy]

Species did not jump from one to the other.

Thats not what I said. I know evolution from one species to another in one generation doesn't happen (most of the time). Changing of one species into another takes hundreds of thousands to millions of years. Although new species can be created in one generation through cross-breeding. Evolution does imply that one completely different species arrose from another. Remember an "ancestor" is still a different species.

Just like man and monkey SHARE a common ancestor

What point are you trying to make? That ancestor would still be labled, by most people, as a type of ape which is what many evolutionary theories on human origins say is where we came from.

The theory states that species SHARE a common ancestor. Reptiles did not just wake up one day and become mammals.

Mammals are said to have originated from a type of reptile. I never implied that it was a from specific reptile that was still alive today. So I was correct in what I said.

 

[Phobos]

However, evolution of one completely different species into another has not been proven and the only evidence to suggest it is that some species look similar to others.

As from your later posts, I assume you are talking about so-called "macroevolution". There is more evidence supporting that than you suggest. The evidence is not just based on morphology (existing and fossil species). It's also based on the positions of the fossils in time and geography (e.g., tracing the development through the ages by looking at different rock strata). Genetics futher strengthens the evidence and corresponds to the fossil evidence. Not only are more closely-related species (based on morphology/fossil locations) more genetically similar, but there are also examples of unique genetic markers that can found between species believed to have a recent common ancestor.

Keep in mind that natural selection and evolution are two different things.

No, natural selection is part of evolution. I think you're confusing so-called micro- and macro-evolution. It's the same process. Populations have variations, and sometimes new variations. N.S. is what we use to describe the differential survivial of the better suited variations for the particular ecosystem at hand.

 

[Phobos]

I think it should be taught as a theory, like all things, not as fact and that students should be encouraged to think for themselves, but the born-again's don't like that either I guess.

An important distinction needs to be made here. Evolution is both a fact and a theory. It's a fact that evolution happens (lifeforms change, as can be directly observed). The theory explains (1) how that happens and (2) what the history of it has been.

It's a misconception to think that, in science, ideas go from hypothesis to theory to law. A theory does not become a law once "proved". Developing theories, and continually improving them, are the ultimate goal of science. A law is just a description of a process (e.g., an object you drop will fall at a rate of 9.8 m/s/s). A theory explains why (e.g., the object falls due to the behavior of spacetime, as explained in General Relativity).

Often times, veteran creationists will accept what they call microevolution (small changes in species such as breeds of dogs) but reject so-called macroevolution (the history of major changes such as fish to amphibians to reptiles to mammals).

more on this...
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9917/evolution/theory.html
http://books.nap.edu/html/creationism/introduction.html

 

[russ_watters]

Russ, I think you underestimate the size of this population. You seem to think most Christians share your ideas. You are among the minority.

That's disturbing, Gokul - I had no idea it was that bad. Obviously, my perception is guided by my experience: I don't know a lot of people who have less than a college education.

 

[russ_watters]

I don't really care if people do teach evolution in school. I'm already flooded with things that you could call "offensive" to my religion. Every day I'm asked, in school, to participate in atleast something that is directly against my religion but still considered a "school" activity. There are posters all over my school incouraging kids to vote, join the armed forces, give blood, pledge allegence, "show pariotism," or even make Christmas orniments during the holidays, etc, all of which is against my religion. Not to mention my American Government class (I don't hate it, or even really dislike it). We're suppost to due research on the election even though in my religion you aren't suppost to be involved in politics or support government.

If I may ask, what religion is that? I've never heard of any of that (with the possible exception of the Amish).

 

[Janitor]

If I may ask, what religion is that?...

The parts about not pledging an oath and not celebrating holidays sound like Jehovah's Witness.

 

[Janitor]

... Some of the them believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old, and what that means is that all the evidence we find such as bones of dinosaurs isn't real. All of that was already in place when the Earth was created, and those ancient animals never lived. So from that perspective, everything that science considers as evidence isn't real, and isn't going to convince them of anything.

There is a novel co-written by Arthur Clarke, The Light of Other Days, which revolves around the invention of a time periscope. I can't remember if that is exactly what it is called in the book, but that gives you the idea. The operator dials in a time and place that he or she wants to view, and it shows up on a monitor screen. It is fun to imagine how Biblical literalists would react to such a machine. I suppose some of them would say that it was an instrument of the Devil, and nothing that showed up on the screen need actually have been a real event. Or they could say that just as God planted fake dinosaur bone fossils in the ground, He also puts fake video of dinosaurs running around the swamps 80 million years ago onto the monitor screen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Light_of_Other_Days

Reading the book got me to wondering how hard it would be to locate someone such as Jesus with such a device. Dial in the latitude and longitude of some skull-shaped hill near Jerusalem, set the time for 1970 years or so ago, and fast-forward the time control to watch for any Roman-style crucifixions taking place on the hill. Probably there were a whole slew of such executions on the hill, so look for distinguishing characteristics of the crucifixion of Jesus, such as the sword wounding and the thief on a nearby cross. If I recall, the device in the novel did not transmit sound. But somebody who knows Aramaic could probably lip-read what people were saying back then. Surely Aramaic has undergone large changes since then, though? Imagine how different English will be when it is two millennia old, as compared to Old English.

And, uh, if the time periscope showed Oswald as the lone gunman on that November day in 1963, no doubt some conspiracy theorists would likewise deny the validity of the device.