Ten questions to ask your biology teacher
From RnRWiki
There are rumours of an email going round in fundie circles, designed to give their sprogs ammo to fox the evil atheist evilutionist teachers. Now, arguing with creatos is an art form that many teachers don't have time to study or the experience to deal with. So here are our answers. Some are quick and punchy, some are unabashedly caustic, but you may feel free to use any and all.
Contents |
Questions and Answers
The Origin of Life
"Why do textbooks claim that the 1953 Miller-Urey experiment shows how life's building blocks may have formed on the early Earth when conditions on the early Earth were probably nothing like those used in the experiment, and the origin of life remains a mystery?"
- If they do, they're out of date. Later experiments with more accurate conditions produced the same results as Miller-Urey.
- (another answer)
Darwin's Tree of Life
"Why don't textbooks discuss the "Cambrian Explosion," in which all major animal groups appear together in the fossil record fully formed instead of branching from a common ancestor - thus contradicting the evolutionary tree of life?"
- Define a "major animal group." Fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals all are post-Cambrian. And I'd be surprised if many textbooks don't discuss the Cambrian explosion.
- (another answer)
Homology
"Why do textbooks define homology as similarity due to common ancestry, then claim that it is evidence for common ancestry - a circular argument masquerading as scientific evidence?"
- They don't. Homology could exist because of common ancestry or similar adaptive pressure. Combined with other evidence, homology can make an existing case for common ancestry stronger.
- (another answer)
Vertebrate Embryos
"Why do textbooks use drawings of similarities in vertabrate embryos as evidence for their common ancestry even though biologists have known for over a century that vertabrate embryos are not most similar in their early stages, and the drawings are faked?"
- Biologists have known no such thing. Twentieth-century and current embryological research confirms that early stages of vertebrate embryos are more similar than later ones. "Faked" drawings are not relied upon: there has been plenty of research in developmental biology since Haeckel.
- (another answer)
Archaeopteryx
"Why do textbooks portray this fossil as the missing link between dinosaurs and modern birds even though modern birds are probably not descended from it and its supposed ancestors do not appear until millions of years after it?"
- What is a "missing link?" The concept has no relevance in evolutionary biology. Archaeopteryx is a transitional fossil in that it shows both reptile ancestry and bird specializations. Claims that "supposed ancestors" are younger than Archaeopteryx are false; these fossils are not ancestors but concurrent relatives of Archaeopteryx.
- (another answer)
Peppered Moths
"Why do textbooks use pictures of peppered moth camouflaged on tree trunks as evidence for natural selection when biologists have known since the 1980s that the moths don't normally rest on tree trunks, and all the pictures have been staged?"
- These pictures are illustrations used to demonstrate a point - the advantage of protective coloration to reduce the danger of predation - not as scientific evidence used to prove that point in the first place.
- (another answer)
Darwin's Finches
"Why do textbooks claim that beak changes in Galapagos finches during a severe drought can explain the origin of species by natural selection, even though the changes were reversed after the drought ended, and no net evolution occurred?"
- Textbooks present the finch data to illustrate natural selection: that populations change their physical features in response to changes in the environment. That no new species evolved does not refute that evolution occurred.
- (another answer)
Mutant Fruit Flies
"Why do textbooks use fruit flies with an extra pair of wings as evidence that DNA mutations can supply raw materials for evolution, even though the extra wings have no muscles and these disabled mutants cannot survive outside the laboratory?"
- How doesn't a mutation that produces novel structures show how "DNA mutations can supply raw materials for evolution"? Just because they were not beneficial mutations does not mean they didn't provide variation for natural selection to work on.
- (another answer)
Human Origins
"Why are artists' drawings of ape-like humans used to justify materialistic claims that we are just animals and our existence is a mere accident when fossil experts cannot even agree on who our supposed ancestors were or what they looked like?"
- Drawings of humans and our ancestors illustrate the general outline of human ancestry. Scientists agree on the big picture of human evolution even if new discoveries add new details. I don't agree with your belief that such drawings are used to "justify materialistic claims."
- (another answer)
Evolution a Fact?
"Why are we told that Darwin's theory of evolution is a scientific fact even though many of its claims are based on misrepresentations of the facts?"
- Darwin's theory of evolution is very different and less complete than what modern scientists call "the theory of evolution." Darwin got many things right, but some things wrong. Mistakes in an early version of a theory don't weaken its current form.
- (another answer)
General Answers
- Most of these questions deal with issues surrounding supposed "textbooks," so questioning which textbooks, exactly, make the claims the questions charge them with is usually appropriate. Be prepared, though, if your own textbook is just such an example!
- RnR member espritch had this to say: "Instead of answering these questions (snarky or otherwise), let the students answer them. Wait until some budding creationist asks one of these questions and go 'Ah. Question number X, correct?' (X being the particular question number). When the student asks for clarification, explain that it is question X on the list of 10 questions to ask a your biology teacher. Then have the student who asked hand out the list to the class and tell them that part of their grade for the year will be to determine how an evolutionary biologist would answer these 10 questions. This will simultaneously take the wind out of Creationist Junior's sails and put the burden on the students to actually investigate the issues.You could suggest a few useful resources like Talk Origins. Near the end of the semester, collect the papers and spend maybe a day discussing the answers."
- RnR member Patchy has an answer ready for the whole thing: "How 'bout, instead of you wasting class time trying to play Stump the Evil Science Man with tired, slack-jawed fundie nonsense, you just shut the fuck up, listen, and maybe learn something about how the world works?"
