Change in Korean science textbooks about evolution

ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
Change in Korean science textbooks about evolution

.A number of core references to the theory of evolution contained in Korean science textbooks such as archaeopteryx and ‘the changes of horse over time’ have disappeared from those textbooks.

http://www.koreabang.com/2012/stories/evolutionary-theory-to-disappear-from-science-textbooks.html

Archaeopteryx is now in question as evidence of a connection between dinosaurs and birds. Birds maybe have evolved even before dinosaurs.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090609092055.htm

The chart showing horse evolution appears to not have sufficient evidence.

The changes in the textbooks are bringing the books up to date, but there is reaction that it is because of christian protest in Korea.

I was quite tied into the dinosaur-bird evolution path. Didn't like that it could be wrong. Was I just behind the times? I would rather correct my understanding than hold on to a pet theory despite the discomfort of changing my opinion

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
 bump Still looking for

 bump

 

Still looking for some thoughts on this from my fellow evolutionists.

 

ex wrote:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090609092055.htm

 

I was quite tied into the dinosaur-bird evolution path. Didn't like that it could be wrong. Was I just behind the times? I would rather correct my understanding than hold on to a pet theory despite the discomfort of changing my opinion

 

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
The dino -> bird hypothesis

The dino -> bird hypothesis was never one that made much sense to me. There were no pressures to evolve flight then, instead of previously. Quite the opposite. A mass extinction opens niches to be filled.

Though I did prefer it to its senseless predecessor of stupid, slow, giant reptiles, it was still off.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


tonyjeffers
tonyjeffers's picture
Posts: 482
Joined: 2012-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I just so happened to be

I just so happened to be updating myself on recent evolutionary theory and findings.-Just like the science books will always need updating. I have no problem with creationists pointing out or even insisting on text being updated if it is justified, but they are  too eager to throw out a whole theory(evolution in general) just because further evidence has shown a part of it could be inacurrate.  Who knows what we'll dig up tomorrow? That's what's so cool about science.

Also this is one problem when people label something as a "missing link" as if there was just one. There's also , of course, a difference between "first" and "oldest known"

So I didn't reply when you first posted it for fear of making uneducated statements. And I still have nothing of any substance to tell you. Just wanted you to know it raises good questions and wasn't being ignored.

I'm even re-reading "origin of species" because my previous readings were sectioned and interrupted.

There's a few articles on archaeopteryx I've read.  Here's just one  http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110727/full/news.2011.443.html

In the replies there was an interesting comment from a teacher -

My 7th grade students have decided that the best way to deal with this situation is simply to include Birds with Dinosaurs. Many things they learn are oversimplifications, geared to their levels, but in the past dinosaurs have always been taught as a group that no longer exists, separate from all other vertebrates. My students have concluded that the similarities between the two groups warrants the inclusion of birds into the older group of dinosaurs. (super-order)

Anyway, If I find anything worthy or interesting in my studies I'll keep this thread in mind

 

"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Vastet wrote:
The dino -> bird hypothesis was never one that made much sense to me. There were no pressures to evolve flight then, instead of previously. Quite the opposite. A mass extinction opens niches to be filled. Though I did prefer it to its senseless predecessor of stupid, slow, giant reptiles, it was still off.

When I come across something on this I read it. That does not mean I will swear by the names and terms I use. Not my field.

Reptiles are splayed legs and dinosaurs are legs straight down like mammals. Among the dinos there are many types. Among those types are the theropods. Those are the mainly two hind legs for walking and the other two that vary from useless to other things. There were all kinds of theropods that never make the popular presentation mainly because they are more suited to steal chickens than destroy Tokyo.

That said your skepticism is largely what I have been reading. Faced with the fact that it happened (no other ancestors that could have lead to birds) how it happened is an active area of speculation. You are quite correct.

There is presently no clear path on how it happened. The two competing are living in trees and jumping and running with early wings decreasing weight so running faster.

However the niche for flying has always been there. Many kinds of insects and two (three?) different types of reptiles did it. One kind of fish does it today as well as bats, a couple squirrels and a snake. If there is gliding flying is just an improvement. How any of them got into flying is equally challenging. The interest is simply on dinos to better understand birds. They all have the same problem. But if we look at the gliders today there are plenty of suggestions as to how it improved to flying. Flyers add thrust while in the air, gliders do not.

There is a pressure to leap to catch prey or get away. It happened many times before a theropod species or three got into it. In fact Archaeopteryx has a different "finger" elongated than birds so at least two species flew.

As to niches, birds are warm blooded therefore theropods were warm blooded. Therefore they could quickly dominate outside the tropics and migrate south to put pressure on the flying reptiles in the winter. They could eventually simply ate the food of the reptiles because they were smaller and more agile and could increase in numbers by dominating the temperate regions.

There is a bit of more recent indications of this. South America before the land bridge was dominated by marsupials and flightless killer birds. After the land bridge placental mammals from North America replaced the flightless birds and most of the marisupials. And North American marisupials made inroads. Why? Very good question but not all that out of line. Very few niches exist that placental mammals cannot dominate. Predator flightless birds cannot compete.

Anyway this means we should assume flightless birds were the first birds from which came the flying kind because they can hold their own against everything but placental mammals. We might then look at the wild turkey as the intermediary form that uses flight for specialized purposes rather than the norm. Chickens also but go try to find a wild chicken to study. They can survive as prey by the strategy of numbers but they are out-hunted as predators. Now explain why they survive as hunters against marisupials but not against placentals.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10688
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Dinosaurs are pretty well

Dinosaurs are pretty well the perfect example of science fixing things as it goes. Originally thought to be giant reptiles. Then we concluded that cold blooded, small brained giants had no way to survive. Now we 'know' they were warm blooded. Just in the last couple weeks we've determined that we've likely been vastly overestimating their weight. A 200 tonne Brachiosaur probably actually only weighed 60 tonnes.

But they are also an example of the reality we can never know everything. Only so much can be determined with certainty regarding events and life forms that occurred millions of years ago.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3442
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
this doesn't really surprise

this doesn't really surprise me.  among east asians, the koreans have a reputation for being an extremely emotional people, and it seems they don't do anything halfway, no matter which end of the peninsula you're on.

while the north might be insanely fanatical about their "great leader," the south is becoming the new stonghold of batshit crazy evangelical christianity.  they even send missionaries to the united states, and, according to several talks i had to endure while working for campus crusade back in the day, they regularly pray that their american brethren will come under a religiously oppressive government so as to be shaken out of their complacency.

seriously, i wouldn't be surprised if, in another generation, south koreans start referring to themselves as a "christian nation," the same way so many ignorant americans do now.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

iwbiek wrote:
seriously, i wouldn't be surprised if, in another generation, south koreans start referring to themselves as a "christian nation," the same way so many ignorant americans do now.

That would be good. Then they can worship St. MacArthur who walked on water.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml