Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?

How about two modern evolutionary experiments that show it takes a billion replications for each evolutionary transition (mutation) for adaptation. What does that do for your theory of evolution? Have I missed anything? That is have I missed anything other than you in the reptiles evolve into birds clique can't do math.

You English have certainly come a long way since the time your people produced the King James Bible translation and produced scientists like Isaac Newton and Michael Faraday. Now you think that the correct explanation of modern evolutionary experiments is hubris. When did you decide that mathematics should no longer be part of the English educational system?

Do you understand the mathematics of quality control? Let's say you are a manufacturer of millions of copies of a part for some kind of machine. And that part has to be within specific tolerances in order for the machine to work. Your customer wants to know if this part will work every time. Testing all of the millions of parts is way too costly so you sample from that pool of parts and do a statistical analysis. That's what I've done with that pool of papers and none have contradicted the math that I've presented. Now, all you have to do is find one paper that proves the math that I've presented is wrong. Start reading. ibid, see above Yawn
Combination therapies for combating antimicrobial resistance - PMC Why Do Cancer Treatments Stop Working? - NCI https://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/78/9/2419 Combination therapy - Wikipedia Combination Approaches to Combat Multi-Drug Resistant Bacteria - PMC How many papers do you want me to cite? Now get off your lazy butt and find a single paper that contradicts the math that I've presented. What is with you people in the fish evolves to mammals clique? Is your reading list limited to fossil tea-leaf reading journals and Mad magazine? You are so ignorant of the real examples of evolution, it is pathetic.

You are not thinking. So you think that combination therapy doesn't demonstrate actual medical results for hiv, cancer, tb, leprosy, malaria,... You need to expand your reading list beyond fossil tea-leaf reading journals and Mad magazine.

whatever

Is that what you think "whatever" means? Look it up.

I could ask you the same thing. The reason Newton/Darwin/Einstein/Pythagoras are remembered is that they gave a correct explanation of physics/biology/geometry. What Darwin didn't do is correctly quantify his theory but he did recognize qualitatively the two fundamental processes of evolution, competition (what Darwin called the struggle for existence), and adaptation. Does anyone remember the most important flat-earther of all time? Because that will be like remembering the most famous fish evolves into mammals clique member. Do you think that finding a fossil of an aquatic animal (or some land animal that died and ended up) in river sediment is some startling discovery as unusual a specimen it might be? What exactly does this fossil tell you about the physics and mathematics of evolution? Zero, nothing, zilch, nada. If you want to understand the physics and mathematics of evolution, you have to consider real, measurable, and repeatable empirical examples of the process. And not Tiktaalik, not Australopithecus, not archidumbtrex, tell you anything about the physics and mathematics of evolution. Why can't you explain anything about DNA evolution with fossils? The reason is you can't describe what is going on at the molecular level with gross anatomy. That's like trying to explain quantum mechanics with classical physics. If you want to know how many replications it takes to make a transitional step in a DNA evolutionary process, you have to study and understand evolutionary experiments such as the Kishony and Lenski experiments. And these experiments show that each transitional step (mutation) takes about a billion replications. So, if Tiktaalik is some kind of transitional form to a tetrapod, you should have vast numbers of these fossils in your riverbed and that just for a single mutational transitional step.So, where does that leave you? It leaves you with the argument that the DNA evolution of bacteria somehow works differently than more complex replicators. Try recombination. Taq has. Of course, Taq doesn't understand the mathematics of recombination. Try some kind of lateral gene transfer. Maybe Tiktaalik caugth a viral infection that gave it the coding and regulatory genes to produce limbs. That sounds like the kind of thing you should teach to naive school children so that they will understand the physics and mathematics of evolution. These children will be totally prepared to deal with drug-resistant infections and failed cancer treatments. Maybe you fossil tea-leaf readers and you in the fish evolves into mammals clique think this is wise to teach to children. I think you are introducing insanity into our educational system and it is showing.

If you feel compelled to explain some plethora with silly mythology to naive children, please don't. It's much more important for naive school children to learn the mathematical and physical facts of life of how evolution works. After all, if you don't think that drug-resistance is getting worse, you have lost contact with reality.

"Whatever" means your reading list is limited to fossil tea-leaf reading journals and Mad magazine. You and the rest of your fish evolve into mammals clique really need to expand your whatever reading list to include some scientific papers. Those are the papers that explain the physics and mathematics of evolution.Edited by Kleinman, : Typo

whatever. And if you have trouble with the meaning of that word, look it up.

That's one of the meanings, words can be ambiguous. You should try mathematics but your problem is that you aren't pretending.

You don't see it because you only have one eye. The Kishony experiment based on antimicrobial drug-resistance is not the only well-measured example of DNA evolution. You also have the well-measured Lenski experiment that uses starvation as the selection pressure and DNA evolution works the same way in that experiment. The empirical evidence that eukaryotic DNA evolution also works the same way is now becoming more available. But if you have a rational argument that DNA evolution works differently for different selection conditions, you should make that argument now. You won't. With respect to the notion of common descent, some simple replicator in the primordial soup + time = a Straggler, forget it. You can't even explain all the genetic differences between humans and chimps in a million generations (10,000,000 years and 10 years/generation). The accounting rules for DNA evolution don't even close to balancing the books on that one. I'm showing you how DNA evolution works and the way that biologists and population geneticists use this math to do their DNA phylogenetics is totally wrong. The way they use it, you could find some homologous piece of DNA from a banana and show that you are closely related. I took a college course in geology many years ago and never studied astronomy but if their work is anything like what biologists have done with the subject of evolution, I wouldn't take anything they say at face value. I'm old enough to remember that the evolution of drug-resistance was a major supporting argument for the theory of evolution. All I have done is run the numbers and it is not me that has done the extrapolation gone mad. All I have done is put the variables mutation rate and the number of replications in the correct mathematical context. When you do, it becomes readily apparent why it takes a billion replications for each evolutionary transition step. And it doesn't matter what the selection pressure is. Check out the Lenski experiment which uses starvation as the selection pressure and the same math applies. You should check it out yourself and try to find any empirical example which contradicts this math. You won't find one.

Public schools haven't always been like this and be careful, churches can be like this as well.

You can't even explain microevolution correctly. None in your fish evolves to mammals clique can.

So you think you have the ability to tell what is good and evil? You can't even do a simple math problem which if you did explains how drug-resistance evolves. That would prevent much suffering and many deaths from drug-resistant infections and failed cancer treatments.If you want to learn something about the subject of good and evil, read the story about Joseph in the book of Genesis. Toward the end of the story, Joseph says this to his brothers (Genesis 50:20), "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today." Read that story and learn something about redemption and reconciliation and how God brings about good from evil.If you want a modern example of this kind of story, read about Desmond Doss and his actions during World War 2 and the battle in Okinawa. I think you have no idea what good and evil is and God to you is nothing more than a genie in a bottle that must do your will. Well, you have been successful in getting the Bible out of public schools and we now have a couple of generations of children that don't understand these principles.