Student Expectations
How Will I Meet This Expectation?
How Did I Meet This Expectation?
Demonstrate ability to
evaluate sources of
biology information on
the internet

Use resources from websites like .org,
.gov, .edu. except for Wikipedia. Look for peer reviewed sources
and that the sources match each other in content and accuracy.
I have reviewed several resources people have put forth and have denied them or have supported it.
Demonstrate an ability
to read and understand
current biology news
Be up to date with current biological events and phenomenon.

I clearly understood Collin's post source here
The source for my post was easily understandable here
Demonstrate proper
use of online resources

Link sites that have only been reviewed by 3+ peers and is credible.
I have put the site:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/feb/22/uknews.sciencenews
, and it has been approved by 3 of my peers.
Publish work that is
available for peer-review
Clearly list work that is done, make it easily readable to others.
See the latter of this page and there is a post, refer to "Bacteria ARE Computers?"
Discuss published work
with a practicing biologist
in that particular field

Attempt to interview a scientist and query him for his/hers thoughts on the topic.

Provide constructive
peer-review to
classmates
Give reasons why or why not the idea is wrong, correct, or badly stated/worded
Asked why a post up for peer-review is not complete.
-- No picture
-- No main source
-- But other sources were accurate and informative
Connor's post was interesting here
Discuss in-class
assignments

Look up data and use it to fortify my or demolish others ideas and speculations.

I Have had multiple arguments with classmates on topics in the blog. HERE
Apply creativity
to work
Bring in new and interesting ideas and thought into the conversation.

this is a poll i made HERE for the post Bacteria ARE Computers?

Good Evening.
Hello I am <Name>.
This is my wiki-account-info.
If you are reading this you have no life or... your in my class.
©Me Media
The projects we had done so far that i really enjoyed was the recent "cell mimic" lab.
Agar or agar agar is a gelatinous substance derived from seaweed. Historically and in a modern context, it is chiefly used as an ingredient in desserts throughout Japan, but in the past century has found extensive use as a solid substrate to contain culture medium for microbiological work. The gelling agent is an unbranched polysaccharide obtained from the cell membranes of some species of red algae, primarily from the genera Gelidium and Gracilaria, or seaweed (Sphaerococcus euchema). Commercially it is derived primarily from Gelidium amansii.
"from wikipedia.org"
200px-Youkan_mizuyoukan.jpg
200px-Youkan_mizuyoukan.jpg




Coke Cola Bomb





Bacteria ARE Computers?

external image clip_image002.jpgbacteria.jpg
Source
By Frank

Scientists have successfully written into the DNA of a living organism. This new breakthrough could lead to new computers that can self-repair if they are damaged. Although the phrase encoded was short it shows the beginning of a new era. E=MC^2 1905!, was written into the genetic code. The bacterium used in the experiment was one of the most tenacious strains of Bacillus Subtilis.
Professor Yoshiaki Ohashi of Keio University in Tokyo says that this form of information storage is useful for storing large amounts of data, but only data that can be retrieved slowly.
The coding and decoding is a long and hard process. The encoding process consists of turning the message into binary code. Binary code is the basic language computers talk to one another.
Ex. E=MC^2 1905! Translates to:
01000101001111010100110101000011010111100011001000100000001000000011000100111001001100000011010100100001 in binary code.
Next the binary code was converted into artificial DNA. AG is made into 1000 (Adenine and Guanine) and TC is made into 0111 (Cytosine and Thymine). The DNA was then injected into the bacterium. One problem is that bacteria are very resilient to foreign microbes.
Bacteria are only the beginning. Professor Ohashi states,” The process would work equally well in plants, fruit and insects. Cockroaches are very interesting, because they have an ability to tolerate [extreme] environments."
In a case in Israel scientists successfully made a microscopic computer and used it to identify lung cancer in blood. The computer used DNA to tell the cancer to self-destruct.
What other possibilities can these computers bring? Do you think they can be the first miracle cure for disease?


click here for the poll on this topic: HERE




l l
l l
\ l l
V
rolls-royce-phantom-coupe.jpg
Rolls Royce


Miss Baker's Note: The following is an opinion and does not represent the position of the science department at this school. Students who wish to understand why scientists do not consider Intelligent Design a credible, scientific theory should access the following resources: Expelled Exposed, Teach Them Science, and National Academies of Science (more are available upon request). If you would prefer to watch a video, the following gives a good overview of the issue:



Also recommended is the video, Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial, which is available to watch for free here.


Darwinism at war with Creationism and Intelligent Design?
-Article One

external image clip_image002.jpg
© 2008 Premise Media Corporation.
All Rights Reserved.

Photo Source

“The freedom to legitimately challenge “Big Science’s” orthodoxy…without persecution.
The debate over evolution is confusing and to some, bewildering: “Wasn’t this all settled years ago?” The answer to that question is equally troubling: “Yes…and no.””
--Ben Stein

Since Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection much evidence has been discovered. 150 Years ago Darwin had no idea what microbiology, DNA, Einstein’s Theories, or the Big Bang Theory. These discoveries have led scientists to reconsider the simple solution by Darwin. Which is that life is a random, purposeless, chanced occurrence, with the exception of natural selection. Of course natural selection would not be accountable in the beginning of time because there were no bioorganic life forms to fight amongst one another. Unlike he studied, be he was not an astrophysicist; the universe and life itself are turning out to be far more complex than he had believed (i.e. Billions of galaxies, black holes, supernovae, Quasars, etc).

Darwin’s theory is not one, but many. The first can be universally agreed upon to be true.

# 1 = The first can define evolution as “minor changes in features of individual species They take place over a small or moderate period of time (source).
# 2 = The Theory of Universal Common Descent - is the idea that all biological life came from a “single common ancestor somewhere in the distant past. This states that we came from a descending branch of animals or specimens that came from an original life form that came from something that ‘somehow’ came into existence (source).
  1. 3 = “natural selection had the power to produce fundamentally new forms of life.” Which means that this ‘somehow materialized’ cell or life form branched off to the adaptations of the environment and that the smartest and fittest reproduce and keep on the species (source).

Darwinism is used to describe Darwin’s many works on evolution. Thomas Henry Huxley made the term or word in April of 1860, and his term was used to describe things to do with evolution; and others such as Malthusian and Spencerism. In the 19th Century it had come to mean that natural selection was the only variable in evolution. A modern Darwinist, Dr. Richard Dawkins, is the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He has written many books on evolution such as The Selfish Gene, Climbing Mount Improbable, and others. He is a deep believer in Darwinism and had an interview with Ben Stein for the movie. Dawkins is an atheist who has written many books on God, gods, and deities; and why they’re inexistent. In the interview Ben asked him to put a number on how certain there is not a single super natural being; Dawkins admitted not 99% but around 60%. He says, “ God is as unlikely as fairies, hobgoblins, etc.” (Source about 3/4 through) (A video/website Dawkins would probably look at. Cite)

In 1859 Darwin wrote his book, The Origin of Species. His first entry of the book dictates the five philosophies:
1. Probability and chance
2. The nature, power and scope of selection
3. Adaptation and teleology
4. Nominalism vs. essentialism about species
5. The tempo and mode of evolutionary change

Darwin and his critics realized that he approached evolution as these five topics. (Source)

When you see the word “evolution.” You should ask yourself, “Which of the three definitions is being used?” Because arguments and evidence supporting #1 do not support #2 or #3!”
--Ben Stein
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/darwinism/
Intelligent Design is the theory that ‘something’ influenced the flow of life. This ‘something’, being a Deity or other life form producing our existence or simply said a random jumble of everything. The minimum for a simple life form to be into existence is 24 proteins. But to point out the probability of that happening is one in one trillion trillion trillion or 1/1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. The point of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is to reject the idea that “the case is closed”.
Dawkins also said (simplified) “ I have no idea how it started and nor does anyone else.”
Although if the idea of intelligent design has an idea be it religion because the religion is self explanatory being it based around a central being or beings.
The controversy is:

--In Neo-Darwinism, Life is a process which is determined by changes in the environment.
--The theory Darwin put into action is the only thing taught at schools as the only option of how life came to be. But the Intelligent Design theory has emerged to challenge neo-Darwinian theory.
--“Both are scientific theories and are there by legitimate”. Intelligent design is sometimes mistaken for religion; although generally associated with it, I.D. can mean any being of any sort influencing the flow of reality. Evolution is the theory that life evolved from a life form and adapted to its surroundings in small general amounts as needed. Thus making unique individuals, which can’t survive in other environments (i.e. penguins in the desert).
--The main point of this Controversy is asking if life is with some sort of creator; or is it random and purposeless; with of course the exception of natural selection after the first being came into existence; natural selection cannot explain why twenty four molecules came together at the right place and time and made a cell, but intelligent design/random movements can, rock has no intelligence as they are inanimate objects. Also teachers and scientists are trying to keep religion and science separate so they do not interfere. But many scientists do not agree with Darwin’s theory but instead with intelligent design; Einstein is the best known saying himself that,“ Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.
Here the three questions are presented:

Question #1
There is growing support among scientists that there is evidence of intelligent design operating in nature. Albert Einstein believed this. An example would be how you manipulate fish, ants, or smaller beings being affected by your presence. You put a leaf down in front of an ant you affect its existence. Yet these scientists, researchers and educators are being routinely persecuted for their scientific views. Teacher John Freshwater is in danger of being fired because he kept a Bible in his desk. Who is behind this persecution? Why is this happening in America? How did this situation develop?
Question #2
Should the enterprise of science somehow be treated differently from all other forms of human knowledge? Not being able to be skeptically questioned?

All ideas have consequences; be they good or bad.
“And our country was founded on principles of free and open debate.”

Why are schools and universities hiding the debate?

Why are kids today only taught Darwinism and natural selection? Why not both?

Some possible Consequences from teaching a one-sided point of view
· How will ideas of morality change, if life is thought to be purposeless and undirected?
· How will the role of Government change, if the individual is taught by The State that one is accountable only to ones self?
· How will the role of “science” change, if “Big Science” alone determines our worldview?
In my opinion I myself are on the side of intelligent design/creationism.
“America is the first Democracy that was founded on the distinctive worldview that “a Creator” conferred “inalienable rights” on human beings, rather than the State, or another institution, such as “Big Science.””

Check out Ben Stein’s movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed on youtube.com or rent the movie.

What is your opinion in this case? Why do you think some of the modern scientists are trying to hide other opinion? Are the one sided points of view fair to us and the children of the future?
yhst-91338428283717_2036_3809690.jpegyhst-91338428283717_2036_3809690.jpegyhst-91338428283717_2036_4141310.jpeg
1000101
FRANK'S FAIL!

Do a barrel roll!