It happens on the macro and micro scale, that’s been empirically proven, what religious types tend to hate about evolution is the claim that humans had a common ancestor with apes, which isn’t really a necessary thing to mention if we HAVE TO change it.
The Big Bang is merely the most likely and proven theory of the universe so far, and rejecting it in science classes is both unscientific and unnecessary, since it’s a common consensus that’s open to scientific change, not a solidified fact quite yet. Secularism provides the most fairness to all by favoring none, if we refused one religion while promoting another, that creates conflict we can’t deal with, so everyone’s religion is either somehow taught in conflicting interpretations with one another, or we just don’t teach it and focus on actually learning.
Gender “ideology” is a universal thing, america had “gender ideology” a long time beforehand in the 1800s, we called that the Gender Binary, a common, but not universal, thought that gender = sex (despite the words being different in meaning). What you’re worrying about now is the concept that someone’s gender is different than their sex, and that one’s gender can be different than what is assigned at birth, but since the very concept of gender roles and gender are based upon social construction, there’s nothing to say that one’s gender MUST be male or female besides our own social views that aren’t even universal, but rather a simple method of defining things into categories. It’s almost entirely what we choose to acknowledge, alongside how someone neurologically feels. No one is contesting their sex at birth, they’re contesting what their gender has always been. Teaching that it’s more complicated than 2 genders and 2 sexes acknowledges nuance, and benefits the most people overall, with no harm to kids whatsoever.
It’s impossible to change someone’s neurological gender based upo… Read more
@Patriot-#1776Constitution3mos3MO
Evolution is quite literally science
No, it's a scientific hypothesis with zero evidence supporting it. I want to clear a few things up – I believe in traits changing, over time, within different kinds of animals. I believe wolves were the common ancestor of dogs, coyotes, etc. I believe there was probably a common cat ancestor. That's the part that's "science" and has been "proven" – we see it happening. We see dogs changing into other dog breeds. What we never see though, is a Banana turning into a dog, or a Fish turning into a Gorilla, or a Mos… Read more
@PacifiedBureaucrat3mos3MO
“No, it's a scientific hypothesis with zero evidence supporting it”
For microevolution, let's take the example of a simple organism like a bacterium. Bacteria reproduce so quickly that we can observe many generations in a short amount of time. This allows us to see evolution in action. For instance, the development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria is a well-documented example of evolution. When exposed to an antibiotic, most bacteria die. However, some may have a mutation that makes them resistant. These bacteria survive and reproduce, passing on the resistance trait to their offspring. Over time, the population becomes dominated by resistant bacteria - evolution has occurred.
As for macroevolution - we can see clear transitions between species in fossil records, such as the evolutionary sequence leading from primitive synapsid reptiles to mammals, or the transition from fish to tetrapods.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution3mos3MO
let's take the example of a simple organism like a bacterium. Bacteria reproduce so quickly that we can observe many generations in a short amount of time. This allows us to see evolution in action. For instance, the development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria is a well-documented example of evolution. When exposed to an antibiotic, most bacteria die. However, some may have a mutation that makes them resistant. These bacteria survive and reproduce, passing on the resistance trait to their offspring. Over time, the population becomes dominated by resistant bacteria - evolution has… Read more
@9CJ6CB63mos3MO
Macro-evolution on the level you’re speaking of was never a point that I, or most any scientist, is trying to prove, but overtime macro-evolution such as humans from apes over millions of years of micro-evolutionary changes IS possible, I’m not denying that a single generation doesn’t create a whole new species, that’s one of the most common scientific explanations that they’ve never once tried to refute. The first thing you learn in biology class is that it takes a lot of time for noticeable differences to show, and that a single generation doesn’t become… Read more
