Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sciteach · 10-08-2002, 06:39 AM

Ok, I'll admit I've already shown my lack of depth in some areas, and I apologize for coming on a bit too strong, but it was in response to a perceived smugness that you will have to avoid when theists come to your site.

I am a starting teacher, and am being forced to teach biology to high-schoolers. I know little about it, and so have many questions. Here is your chance to educate me about your ideas. I should preface by stating that arguments per se do not always convince someone who has emotional investment in a premise. Data never convinces it only convicts. I would never embark on the futile effort to convince you of God's existence or of ID by argument. Because the real question is "Do you want there to be a super-intelligent God?" The answer to this question skews your reaction to everything else we might discuss. What I am really interested in is the rationality and consistency of certain beliefs and theories.

OK, here's my first real question: How did the first eukaryotic cell come into existence?

RufusAtticus · 10-08-2002, 06:54 AM

Sciteach,

Why are you teaching biology if you don't know the first thing about it? It it freshmen or senior biology?

Question, How did the first eukaryotic cell come into existence?

High School Answer: symbiosis. Last study I saw about this had identified three or four separate sybiotic events in the early history of eukaryotes. Two of them can be traced to the acquisition of mitochondria and chloroplasts. The other one/two are not as clear.

[ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]

S2Focus · 10-08-2002, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sciteach:
Ok, I'll admit I've already shown my lack of depth in some areas, and I apologize for coming on a bit too strong, but it was in response to a perceived smugness that you will have to avoid when theists come to your site.

I am a starting teacher, and am being forced to teach biology to high-schoolers. I know little about it, and so have many questions. Here is your chance to educate me about your ideas. I should preface by stating that arguments per se do not always convince someone who has emotional investment in a premise. Data never convinces it only convicts. I would never embark on the futile effort to convince you of God's existence or of ID by argument. Because the real question is "Do you want there to be a super-intelligent God?" The answer to this question skews your reaction to everything else we might discuss. What I am really interested in is the rationality and consistency of certain beliefs and theories.

OK, here's my first real question: How did the first eukaryotic cell come into existence?

Based on what I've seen here, I'd say that you have come here to *argue*, not to learn.

If you were really interested in learning about the latest theories (theories in the scientific, not colloquial, sense) regarding the origin/evolution of eukaryotic cells, you'd be tracking down relevant *.edu web-sites via <a href="http://www.google.com," target="_blank">www.google.com,</a> or you'd be at your local university library doing some independent research. You wouldn't be asking us to spoon-feed you material that you could easily track down yourself.

sciteach · 10-08-2002, 07:02 AM

Surely this is all conjecture? Biologists dont really have much of an idea, and it is certainly true that no experiments have been done in this area, is it not? So how scientific is your answer? Interesting that the way you stated it had the ring of fact, when indeed it is far from a sure thing. Would you not rather say that it is the idea that most evolutionists can form a concencus on??

sciteach · 10-08-2002, 07:06 AM

If by argue you mean that I have some serious questions for you to answer (I am at YOUR forum)--then, YES.
If by "learning", you mean "believe what we believe", then, NO.
I am aware of quite a few facts concerning the question I have posed, what I want to hear from you is how confident you are of your theories, and the evidence for that conviction.

RufusAtticus · 10-08-2002, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sciteach:
Surely this is all conjecture? Biologists dont really have much of an idea, and it is certainly true that no experiments have been done in this area, is it not?

I don't understand how somone who has admitted that they have no clue about biology can be so arroget and agressive when a biologist answers their question.

Quote:

So how scientific is your answer?

This scientific:
Hedges, S. B., H. Chen, S. Kumar, D. Y.-C. Wang, A. S. Thompson, and H. Watanabe. 2001. A genomic timescale for the origin of eukaryotes. BMC Evolutionary Biology 1:4.

Quote:

Interesting that the way you stated it had the ring of fact, when indeed it is far from a sure thing.

Endosymbiosis is a fact. There are many known instances of endosymbiosis, not just the ones implicated in the origin of eukaryotes.

Quote:

Would you not rather say that it is the idea that most evolutionists can form a concencus on??

This makes absolutely no sense.

[ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]

RufusAtticus · 10-08-2002, 07:14 AM

BTW: I educate Christians every week. It's part of being an instructor in the US.

Non-praying Mantis · 10-08-2002, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sciteach:
I am a starting teacher, and am being forced to teach biology to high-schoolers. I know little about it, and so have many questions.(emphasis by NPM) Here is your chance to educate me about your ideas.

Hello, I am also a biology teacher, although I teach in community college. Although one of my students once said, "Community college is like highschool with an ashtray," it is pitched at a level that is closer to college biology.

I suppose that a teacher shortage has "forced" you to be teaching biology? Otherwise, why would you be teaching something that you don't know anything about. I have a bacherlors in biology and a masters in entomology (that's the study of bugs), so if you have any questions about the subject matter, or how to be a decent teacher in general, you can come to this forum any time you like.

Quote:

I should preface by stating that arguments per se do not always convince someone who has emotional investment in a premise. Data never convinces it only convicts. I would never embark on the futile effort to convince you of God's existence or of ID by argument.

Hmmm... perhaps you do not accept evolution, or do you accept evolution with some design by a creator?

Stick around on this forum, and you can receive a first class education on just what evolution is, how the evidence overwhelmingly supports it (or "convicts" it, as you said), and how creationism is usually "supported" by misquotes, old data, bible passages, and just plain wrong ideas.

Quote:

Because the real question is "Do you want there to be a super-intelligent God?" The answer to this question skews your reaction to everything else we might discuss.

That is not a scientific question, and has no place in a high school biology classroom. However, although I do agree that the answer can "skew" your reaction, looking at the data and the evidence should be all that is required to make an informed decision.

If you wish to discuss the above question about wanting a god to exist, then by all means take a trip to the other appropriate fora on this discussion board.

Quote:

What I am really interested in is the rationality and consistency of certain beliefs and theories.

Good, then you've come to the right place!

Quote:

OK, here's my first real question: How did the first eukaryotic cell come into existence?

OK. One thing I would like to ask you first is: have you read the textbook for information on this question? Your textbook should be the first place you go to when you have questions on biology, if only because it is the same resource that your students will rely on as well. I have read my textbook, how about you?

But, I'll give you a freebie. The first thing you must realize is that the first eukaryotic cell fossils are dated to about 1.7 billion years ago. However, the beginning of life started about twice as long ago, about 3.5 billion years. We are talking about a long period of time and also many changes in environment for these cells (including the introduction of oxygen into the atmosphere). The changes in environment are very important, because this is how natural selection alters its course, which allows for different forms to be selected over time.

First, most of life's chemisty was "perfected" on before the first eukaryotic cells appeared. Prokaryotes did a LOT of evolving before this, so much of the "work" was done previously.

The first eukaryotic cells probably developed something similar to a simple cytoskeleton, which allowed for internal membranes inside the cell. Internal membranes allow for an increase in cell size because additional membranes allow for more surface area, therefore, more chemical reactions in a similar volume.

These proto-eukaryotes then began to develop a simple nucleus, to separate the nuclear reactions from the other reactions of the cell.

Also important, is the allowing of other prokaryotes to reside inside the cell to produce ATP and to allow for photosynthesis. These later became mitochondria and chloroplasts (only in algae), respectively. There you have it, the first eukaryotic cell.

NPM

[ The above post has been edited for content and to fit your screen]

[ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: Non-praying Mantis ]

Non-praying Mantis · 10-08-2002, 07:19 AM

(boy, you guys type fast!)

sciteach · 10-08-2002, 07:29 AM

Thank you for replying in kind. people here are reacting adversely because of otheer posts. My fault mostly. OK, so the real time was spent in evolving prokaryotes that had DNA, RNA, and metabolized and exchanged salts etc. So it wasnt such a big step to eukaryotes, and the paceof evolution increased?
Surely the heat from intense early volcanic activity and meteoroid bombardment would have made the formation of stable prtein chains very difficult during the first one billion years??

10-08-2002, 06:39 AM	#1
sciteach Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 36	Educate a Christian Week Ok, I'll admit I've already shown my lack of depth in some areas, and I apologize for coming on a bit too strong, but it was in response to a perceived smugness that you will have to avoid when theists come to your site. I am a starting teacher, and am being forced to teach biology to high-schoolers. I know little about it, and so have many questions. Here is your chance to educate me about your ideas. I should preface by stating that arguments per se do not always convince someone who has emotional investment in a premise. Data never convinces it only convicts. I would never embark on the futile effort to convince you of God's existence or of ID by argument. Because the real question is "Do you want there to be a super-intelligent God?" The answer to this question skews your reaction to everything else we might discuss. What I am really interested in is the rationality and consistency of certain beliefs and theories. OK, here's my first real question: How did the first eukaryotic cell come into existence?

10-08-2002, 06:54 AM	#2
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	Sciteach, Why are you teaching biology if you don't know the first thing about it? It it freshmen or senior biology? Question, How did the first eukaryotic cell come into existence? High School Answer: symbiosis. Last study I saw about this had identified three or four separate sybiotic events in the early history of eukaryotes. Two of them can be traced to the acquisition of mitochondria and chloroplasts. The other one/two are not as clear. [ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-08-2002, 07:02 AM	#4
sciteach Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 36	Surely this is all conjecture? Biologists dont really have much of an idea, and it is certainly true that no experiments have been done in this area, is it not? So how scientific is your answer? Interesting that the way you stated it had the ring of fact, when indeed it is far from a sure thing. Would you not rather say that it is the idea that most evolutionists can form a concencus on??

10-08-2002, 07:06 AM	#5
sciteach Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 36	If by argue you mean that I have some serious questions for you to answer (I am at YOUR forum)--then, YES. If by "learning", you mean "believe what we believe", then, NO. I am aware of quite a few facts concerning the question I have posed, what I want to hear from you is how confident you are of your theories, and the evidence for that conviction.

10-08-2002, 07:14 AM	#7
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	BTW: I educate Christians every week. It's part of being an instructor in the US.

10-08-2002, 07:19 AM	#9
Non-praying Mantis Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Roanoke, VA, USA Posts: 2,646	(boy, you guys type fast!)

10-08-2002, 07:29 AM	#10
sciteach Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 36	Thank you for replying in kind. people here are reacting adversely because of otheer posts. My fault mostly. OK, so the real time was spent in evolving prokaryotes that had DNA, RNA, and metabolized and exchanged salts etc. So it wasnt such a big step to eukaryotes, and the paceof evolution increased? Surely the heat from intense early volcanic activity and meteoroid bombardment would have made the formation of stable prtein chains very difficult during the first one billion years??

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.