New Florida Board of Education Chair: “I won’t support any evolution being taught as fact at all in any of our schools.”

Florida has a new Board of Education chairman: Andy Tuck.

When the state science standards were rewritten in 2008, Tuck was vice chairman of the Highlands County school board. Several school boards passed resolutions opposing the inclusion of evolution in the new standards. Highlands seriously considered a resolution but eventually backed down. But Tuck did say this:

School Board Vice Chairman Andy Tuck said Thursday, “as a person of faith, I strongly oppose any study of evolution as fact at all. I’m purely in favor of it staying a theory and only a theory.

“I won’t support any evolution being taught as fact at all in any of our schools.”

Then in 2014 Tuck was appointed the state board of education. Reporters recalled his earlier stance on evolution and so decided to follow up with him now that he was at the state level. This is what he said:

“I’m not an evangelical right-winger,” he told me. “I’m not trying to get religion in schools.”


Tuck said his problem is that scientists can’t say for certain how the universe began.

“I guess the thing I struggle with is you’re teaching evolution to fifth-graders and you get done and one says, ‘Where did it start?’” he said. “And you say what?”

As I said back in 2014: Keep in mind that the creationist tactic (I’m not calling Tuck a creationist, but rather referring to the general tactic used by today’s creationists) is to find some way to cast doubt on evolution in the classroom. Decades of legal losses whenever creationists have tried to outlaw evolution instruction or insert blatant creationism into the curriculum have forced them to clean up their overtly religious language. Now they want to allow teachers to spend time on “other theories” while declining to be more specific about those other theories that teachers might bring up are. They want to force a bogus disclaimer into evolution lessons that there are “strengths and weaknesses” to the theory. These are the kinds of moves Florida Citizens for Science faced in 2008 when a state Board of Education member and some lawmakers in the state legislature tried tinkering with the state science standards. So, we can’t feel safe and comfortable when someone says “I’m not trying to get religion in schools.” We heard that over and over again in 2008.

The reason why I bring this up is because he’s now in an even more elevated position at a time fraught with worrying changes happening to our state education system. This summary from the Tampa Bay Times highlights why I’m concerned:

The board is closely aligned to the Governor’s Office, and is taking a key role in overseeing actions including a standards review that Gov. Ron DeSantis has demanded. It appointed Corcoran — DeSantis’ choice for commissioner — without considering other options and is seen as a strong ally in pursuing the governor’s education agenda, which has focused on expanding vouchers, charter schools and other choice options in addition to pushing for improved outcomes in district schools.

Do you think we should be worried?

About Brandon Haught

Communications Director for Florida Citizens for Science.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

75 Responses to New Florida Board of Education Chair: “I won’t support any evolution being taught as fact at all in any of our schools.”

  1. Duane Swacker says:

    “(I’m not calling Tuck a creationist, but rather referring to the general tactic used by today’s creationists)”

    Why not. That is exactly what he is. . .
    . . . or is he a creation scientist?

    The xtisan fundie taliban don’t give up easily.

  2. Carol Rosario says:

    Not sure why Mr. Tuck is anti-theory. As a science teacher, with a Bachelors in Geology, I can tell you, theory has brought us many great inventions, and major changes on Earth. Space travel is a great example.The only reason Evolution is a theory, not a fact, is found in sedimentary rock. We never have found a dinosaur or human in 4billion year old rock. That’s a fact. The dinosaurs were found in 200 million year old rock. That’s a fact. Evolution must always be called a theory, in case, some day a 3 billion year old dinosaur is discovered. After all, we haven’t dug up every rock on Earth. It’s improbable. But new discoveries always change science. There was a time that people thought the Earth was the planetary center. Scientists were thrown in jail if they disagreed. So, instead of going to Bible study, Mr. Tuck needs to take a course in geology, and/or Scientific theory, because he doesn’t know what he is talking about.

    • James says:

      You should go retake your courses because you don’t know what the word theory means. Crying out loud how did you finish your degree?

      • kyuss says:

        you’re an idiot james

        • James is absolutely correct. A theory is an explanation that generates hypotheses when can be tested. The theory of evolution has generated countless hypotheses that have been tested. For instance, the theory predicted that there needed to be something like DNA. William James mentioned this among others. We found DNA and it provided even more evidence that evolution was the best explanation of what we observed.

      • Someone who knows more than you do says:

        It’s also Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity. Go figure.

        • Stentor says:

          Yeah, & as the most clearly qualified scientist here, I have to tell you James is right, the word theory in the scientific context means model, it doesn’t mean the same thing as theory in the legal context, which is generally defined as something that may, or may not be true.
          The majority of you seem ignorant to that contradistinction. In the scientific context, that conforms most closely to the word hypothesis. Context is important, & all of you know that, so stop trying to conflate scientific theory with legal theory, they are not the same thing. In the scientific context, theory means a a generally accepted model of understanding something with factual evidence & peer-reviewed data from experiments that explain it. Evolution is not a theory in the legal context, it is a theory in the scientific context, & therefore, a model.

          <-Works for NASA as an Engineering Physicist

          • Chris says:

            ^ And to add to that, a model that explains the facts known, the experiments done, and the hypotheses support by evidence AND as someone mentioned above makes predictions which in turn are accurate predictions. AND the theory has stood up to scientific scrutiny and test for over 150 years! Scientific Theories like evolution are as “strong” as Scientific Laws. Scientific Laws just explain simple stuff, Scientific Theories explain complex stuff (including sometimes Scientific Laws).

          • dhogaza says:

            I have to tell you that you didn’t read what James said closely enough.

          • dhogaza says:

            Oops, I have to apologize and admit I lost my reference point in the thread 🙂 Yes, James was right.

      • You are, in fact, an idiot. Carol made an accurate description of a theory.

    • Vicki Slagle says:

      I am missing something here, so, if dinosaurs lived 200 million years ago, not 4billion years ago, then evolution is not a fact? Sorry, you lost your point.

      • James says:

        um.. no.. the EARTH is 4 billion.. but was a molten blob for millions of years.. eventually it cooled there are SO many things that happened before dinosaurs came.. please visit your local library ! It is awesome for learning!

    • Julie says:

      Thanks for trying to explain, Carol. From our science classes, we know that a theory is a “proven hypothesis.” I think you lost the guy (who told you to go back to school) when you tried to explain about the sedimentary rock…no matter how much is proven, evolution will always be attacked as it shakes the very foundation of creationism. That can be very scary. We have to keep trying!!

      • Exhausted Science Teacher says:

        No Julie, a theory is not a proven hypothesis. A theory in science is a very broad explanation that can be substantiated with evidence across a wide variety of settings. For example, natural selection can be studied in finches, turtles, ladybugs, and humans. A hypothesis is specific and can be shown to be correct or incorrect using experimentation or preponderance of substantiating data. A theory is big, encompasses a wide variety of settings, and can be tweaked if evidence shows that a newer explanation is better than an old one. This is incorrectly taught in schools and as a high school science teacher I have to unteach it as nauseum.

        • Exhausted Science Teacher says:

          ad nauseum *autocorrect. And I should add, I think I know what you are getting at, so thank you. Evolutionary theory is not something temporary and hypothetical that will be overturned any day now. It is one of those huge ideas in science that has been substantiated hundreds of thousands or even millions of times in different experiments, research studies, and published scientific papers involving nearly infinite amount of different situations. It is still being refined and better understood each day.

    • Joe says:

      How did you get a BS in Geology without learning what the term ‘theory’ means? Hell, one of my degrees is in English and my professor went off over the topic.

      • Kristin Burke says:

        The term theory has a very different meaning in science than the colloquial term most people are familiar with. I spend the entire year trying to get this point across to my students, just to avoid comments and conversations such as this thread. Evolution is very much a scientific theory, which means there is a great deal of evidence to back it up. Maybe listen to the experts instead of constantly trying to argue with them. They have a great deal more knowledge and background than most people. If your dentist says you have a cavity, do you argue with them?

      • David Honig says:

        You confuse the generally used “theory,” which in science would be called “hypothesis,” with the actual definition of “theory” as used in the scientific field. Perhaps that’s because your BA is in English.

    • Josh says:

      Interesting that the grammar police on “theory” don’t seem to understand how the term is used in science.

    • Paul C says:

      just thinking aloud here… gravity is still only a “theory” because nobody’s ever managed to find the elusive graviton, the gravity particle… so maybe Jack Chick was right after all, in that pamphlet he drew which maintains the only thing holding us to the surface of the world is the kindly hand of Jesus! And… the same holy book that tells us the world is only seven thousand years old also has (inferential) teaching that the world is flat and beleiving it is a sphere is a satanic heresy… so how soon before Jack Chick writes the school text books for Florida?

      • No Chance says:

        Gravity is still a theory because there is nothing above a theory in science. The germ theory of disease, evolution and natural selection, general and special relativity, plate tectonics, heliocentrism, all just theories. There is nothing that can be found that will elevate any of them to some state above a theory.

        Evolution is both a theory and a fact. The theory of evolution is supported by the fact of observed evolution as well as an entire body of supporting facts from other fields including genetics, biology, the fossil record, etc.

      • DasKleineTeilchen says:

        goddammit (haha)! its quite easy to explain; a scientific theory is a proven hypothesis – therefore a theory describes the scientific facts.

        and a theroy is fluid, because new facts are added, because science is a forwarding, never stopping process.

        • Gregory Mead says:

          I disagree. How would you define “fact”? You can’t say a fact is “proven”, because EVERYTHING in science is testable and potentially disprovable. What you CAN say is that a “fact” is something that has been tested so many times that it is accepted as true. And that’s also true of “theories”.

          Is it a fact that this rock I’m holding weighs 0.459 kg? Well, if I weigh it, maybe. But if I weigh it, you weigh it, everyone who’s reading this weighs it, and we all come up with the same answer, then we can agree that it’s a fact. But then if we start using a more sensitive scale, we might find that we get a different number. Maybe 0.45883 kg. Maybe 0.459042. Maybe 0.459000 kg. But if we all consistently get the same answer again, then we’ll agree on a new, updated “fact”. And again, that’s similar to how we deal with the concept of a “theory’. As we refine our understanding of the real world, we refine the theory.

          • dhogaza says:

            The rock’s mass is constant. What you’re describing is that the fact that various instruments vary in precision and accuracy.

            If a bunch of people weigh a rock and one or two get vastly different results, then you investigate the instruments they are using, not basic physics.

      • Prof says:

        Gravity is more than a theory, it is a law, which means it’s mathematically supported as well.

        • Richard House says:

          Evolution is a fact, a theory and includes laws as well. A law is not more than a theory. In fact, just the opposite, the theory is more than just the law of gravity.

    • Gregory Mead says:

      PhD in Geology here, if that matters.

      I teach my students:
      A hypothesis is a testable explanation for observations.
      A theory is a hypothesis that has successfully passed so many tests (i.e. explains those observations so well and so consistently) that it is tentatively and informally agreed upon by scientists that it is (for now) considered correct. It IS a successful “model” as Stentor says, but more than that, it explains what we see. THAT’s why we call it a scientific “theory”, not because there’s a great deal of doubt about it.

      Can it change? Sure. Darwin didn’t know about DNA or chromosomes, about genes, and his Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection has changed enormously since he first published it. Same with Plate Tectonic Theory, Gravitational Theory, Atomic Theory, Germ Theory of Disease, Heliocentric Theory and others. They get refined as time goes on (and occasionally overturned), but that’s a strength of the scientific method, not a weakness.

      Ms. Rosario’s reasoning why Evolution is called a theory is incorrect. The reason that we call it a theory is that the term scientists use for a well tested, confirmed (as much as anything in science), tentatively accepted explanation for observations IS “theory”.

      The reason that people like Tuck want to use “theory instead of fact” is that to the general public, “theory” is uncertain and “fact” is proven. The reality is that scientific theories are “proven” as much as anything in science and SHOULD be considered to be scientific facts.

  3. Eric Ruane says:

    Where did god come from then. The zealots always say something can’t happen from nothing…but can never answer where did god come from? If something can’t happen from nothing how did god begin its existence? Did it have god parents? Where did they come from? They ask the questions of science but never to their religion.

    • O Suarez says:

      Science is a PROVEN STATEMENT.
      You have the right to believe whatever you choose, but don’t conflate belief and FACT.

    • Kimmy says:

      Hahah. Religious people don’t need to question their beliefs because their space fairy told them so.
      “God,” has been a pronoun used for mythical space fairies of all religious people for thousands of years.
      There has never been EVIDENCE of any of these throughout the these years.
      Scientists don’t have to say where “god” came from, because “god” is a faith based (not fact based) character used to tell a story that was rewritten and translated many times over.

    • Joe says:

      God has never been taken seriously by the scientific community because there’s no proof, unlike evolution.

      No one is talking about the theory of god.

    • Theresa Stafford says:

      Where did “god” come from? The imaginations of scared cave men…. there is NO proof of any “god”. Feelings and dreams are not proof. If you say that the Bible is proof of your god, then DC comics is proof of Spider-Man….

    • John Cena says:

      God came from Cleveland. He doesn’t like to talk about it, because who wants to be from Cleveland?

    • Dave on the "Left" Coast says:

      Well, Eric, “everybody knows” where “God” came from. “He” came from the Bible. He uttered Himself into being, that is, created Himself out of the Word of God, which is the Bible! So simple . . . the very first Miracle!

  4. Mark Young says:

    “Tuck said his problem is that scientists can’t say for certain how the universe began.”
    Exactly what in the heck does that have to do with evolution being a fact? The theory of evolution doesn’t try to answer the question of how the *life* began, much less how the universe began.

    • Kimmy says:

      Tuck is clearly a dotard, who slept through classes and was wide awake every Sunday. 🤦🏻‍♀️
      Lawrence Krauss, an acclaimed scientist, wrote a book literally titled “a universe from nothing” – this man is unfit for office.

  5. Scott says:

    Something less than 20 percent of protestants deny evolution. How dare these ignorant buffoons claim to speak for their own little sect.

  6. Rob says:

    Idiots like him need voted out now! They want to teach magic and wishful thinking instead facts and reality.
    If you want religion, then go to a had damn church! Separation of church and state is real, it’s in the Constitution and it was put there for a damn good reason!

  7. Danielle says:

    The concept of evolution can be factual or theoretical. Obviously anyone who has seen National Geographic knows survival of the fittest is real. We also know certain traits have allowed certain animals to flourish and adapt better than those animals who didn’t. We also have evidence for God. Humans cannot create rainbows, plants, trees, lions etc. Obviously they did not just create themselves one day. Clearly a higher entity formed the earth and all that is in it or else we humans would have the ability to just create planets and moons and skies and oceans. We don’t. We also have for the evidence of Jesus Christ, 500 witnesses who saw Him alive after being pit to death by Pontius Pilate and crucified. We have people all over the world who have testified of Christ and what He has done for them including curing incurable diseases and even raising people from the dead. Clearly man does not have these powers but a higher power does or they would not have happened. But man doesn’t want to acknowledge their Creator. We want to pretend we are all that exists. But the evidence all around us including our own existence shows this is wishful thinking.

    • Steve says:

      Well, you’re a fucking idiot too. Here say, conjecture, and circular reasoning are not evidence. Those are logical fallacies. You’re the problem.

      • Theresa Stafford says:

        Herp-a-derp…. jebus is real cause the buybull says he’s real! FFS, you can’t be that stupid in real life can you? We KNOW what causes rainbows…. there is ZERO evidence outside of the Bible that jesus ever existed, and PLENTY of evidence that contradicts the Bible…. go check out

    • Theresa Stafford says:

      Seriously? Jesus is real because the Bible says so? There is ZERO proof of jesus outside of the Bible and there is a ton of proof that contradicts the Bible…. like the fact that Rome was a thriving city at the time the flood supposedly happened…. did noah’s Kids go repopulate the city and pick up its history where the romans left off? The romans were fastidious record keepers…. and their history never stopped… that’s just ONE example…. go to and look up inconsistencies. Don’t be afraid…. it’s your very own King James Bible, just laid out in a format you’re not used to!

      • Steve says:

        Babylon, Sumeria and China also thrived during the time of the supposed flood, before and after and made no record of any such event.

    • Justin Knuth says:

      You need to go back in time, and runaway from your family before they taught you all that bullshit. You are a human being with your own brain. You can be who you want. Jesus died a long time ago and he’s never coming back. God is not real. Magic is not real. We owe ourselves to this planet. Is your mind blown?

    • Marty says:

      I would like to see the evidence for jesus’s divinity, there were 500 witnesses, praying to jesus did anything (correlation does not equal causation). Personal testimonials are not evidence. If i said i saw you kill someone does that make it true? You are using the logical fallacy: arguement from ignorance.

    • “We have evidence for god.”
      — No, you don’t.
      “Humans can’t create rainbows…”
      — Actually we can, quite easily, in fact.
      “…plants, trees, lions, etc.”
      — So what? That doesn’t mean a god made them nor that they just made them self out of nothing.
      “We also have evidence for Jesus…”
      No you don’t. You have claims about witnesses from the same source as your claims about Jesus. That is circular reasoning. Muslims have evidence for Muhammad. Mormons have evidence for Joseph Smith. Atheists have evidence for Epicurus. So what? These are irrelevant to both religion and evolution. You don’t want to admit there is no god despite all the evidence all around you that it’s just wishful thinking.

      • Made a Raunbow Today says:

        Please leave us atheists out of this…we are just here with our popcorn reading along.

  8. John kyser says:

    Where did they dig up this clown, evolution was part of my anthropology classes when I went to the university of Oklahoma back in1959 and there was no objection from the reagents for higher education.

  9. Jamie says:

    Two steps forward, one step back. We have to remain engaged and vigilant against these attacks on science.

  10. Clifton Bowers says:

    I am a retired teacher and professor yet I see evolution each day I look in da mirror …I get more Gray hairs and age also we tan in da Sun too…quite simple dah…any moron can figure that shit out ! JFC!

  11. John Tagg says:

    I agree with some of what the new Board of Education chairman: Andy Tuck says. What is misunderstood is the term “theory”. A theory is “how something seems to work every time it has been tested so far”. So, when Andy Tuck says that evolution is a theory he is saying that this is how it seems to work every time it has been tested so far. He is correct. (Also, in science we don’t use the term fact.)
    In science we do not make laws any more, because we know that that in some strange places in the universe, like the middle of a black hole or neutron star, things don’t work the same way. So, the best we can do is have a theory.

  12. Taqasim says:

    Perhaps what ought to be taught to children at that stage is the meaning of the word theory with regard to science, so that they can have a firmer grasp of it than Mr. Tuck has. If they understand the concept of investigative science and how theories are proven, and that science itself keeps evolving as new information comes to light, perhaps they will then also understand the theory of evolution much better. And maybe some of them will go on to contribute to our scientific understanding!

  13. Joe says:

    No problem with this at all. Either all theories should be taught or none. More scientists are turning away from evolution, more turning to creation cause it makes more sense. Posed the question years ago & it still stands. Name one example in all the universe where absolutely something comes form absolutely nothing? The school systems for years have abused their powers like this, and disguising the religion of secular humanism , like false teachings, indoctrination and other impropriety upon the minds of youth and our larger society. This is also disguised free thinking! When you shake it out with unpoliticized Sociology, Philosophy & Education, the door ways and pathways to clear and free thinking become possible.

    • Steve says:

      Another dickhead brain dead thoughtless response. You’re ruining the planet with your delusions. KYS.

    • Gregory Mead says:

      “More scientists are turning away from evolution, more turning to creation cause it makes more sense.”

      BS. That is a lie. Your post is a series of lies. Citation needed for everyone of those statements or you’re just blowing smoke.

    • Andy T says:

      That only makes sense if you are talking about the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which as a “theory” is exactly as credible as Christian creation. Both of those, however, fall short as scientific theories, because there are no facts that would in any form be observable that confirm them as theories. As a matter of fact, most facts rather seem to disprove them as scientific theories, which is why they are generally not taught at school in Non-Shithole-countries.

  14. Celia Kiffor says:

    This all sounds Medieval to me! When I was in college my biology professor asked us if anyone had heard of the lunch bag theory. He was very tongue in cheek when he told us: The Lunch Bag Theory states that evolution began on Earth when some aliens 👽 traveling through space decided to eat their lunch on Earth before any living things were there! They ate and then left their lunch trash, which contained microorganisms which evolved into all the living things on our planet! I have always loved this story, which has little to do with the topic at hand!

  15. Joe, There is only one theory. That’s evolution. That’s why it should be taught. Saying more scientists are turning away from evolution is irrelevant. Going from 2 to 3 biologists who stop doing science to push a religious narrative is not important. There are 50,000 biologists who accept evolution for every biologist who sells out to work for a Christian ministry instead. Name one example of magical spells, zombies rising from the dead or brainless things with high levels of intelligence. At least my requests are relevant to the topic. No one is abusing powers. Schools are supposed to teach us the facts. It’s your choice if you choose your fairy tale over reality. You don’t get to decide for other people’s children to be equally ignorant of science. They have a right to learn real science.

  16. Steve Kirby says:

    Oh dear! Danielle. Of course rainbows and animals didn’t create themselves. And atheists are moved by a beautiful sunset and fall in love and write great music, exactly like religious people.

  17. Steve says:

    So glad I quit teaching in Florida. I’d have been fired this year because I would have made it a point to teach evolution as a fact… in my PE class. Thanks to all the scientists for burying these dimwits with logic and evidence. If you can’t differentiate the meanings of the word theory, you’re not allowed at the adults table for real discussion.

  18. Steve Kirby says:

    Danielle. Of course rainbows and animals didn’t create themselves. Atheists are moved by a beautiful sunset and fall in love, exactly like religious people. The existence of god is not proved by saying’ Aren’t the universe/nature/the human body amazing? So a supernatural being must have made them.’

  19. Waldron says:

    Smh….kids graduate from high school and face employment situations. Opening a checking account, balancing a check book. Buying a vehicle….and all of these humans commenting about evolution and creation. Disproportionate amount of conversation on a topic that will not add any value to their success as a productive part of society.

    Teachers duties now include being breakfast servers in the cafeteria because some parents don’t have the money to feed their children or to lazy to make it and serve. Worry about things you can manage or make better. Unbelievable

  20. Robert Giroux says:

    The term ‘Theory’ is the highest status a concept can achieve in science.
    A Theory is a framework model which incorporates known facts and has predictive value. Furthermore, it is supported by all relevant observations and experiments, and opposed by none.
    In scientific terms, basically :
    – an Hypothesis is an idea that needs to be confirmed
    by finding some evidence for it or evidence that disproves it.
    – a Theory is an evidenced explanation of how something works.
    – a Law is a model that describes a set of data. Basically it explains what something does in contrast to theory that explains how it does it. It has to always be consistent for the same conditions and only applies in those conditions.
    The American Association for the Advancement of Science :
    “A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not “guesses” but reliable accounts of the real world. The theory of biological evolution is more than “just a theory.” It is as factual an explanation of the universe as the atomic theory of matter or the germ theory of disease. Our understanding of gravity is still a work in progress. But the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is an accepted fact”
    Evolution of living beings is a FACT,
    scientifically established from fossil remains and laboratories’ experiments.
    That evolution can be explained by natural selection on the basis of adaptation to a change in the environment is a THEORY.
    And so far it is the best (and the only one!) we have

    To recap:
    – Evolution is a theory and it is also a fact.
    – Evolution is defined as changes in a population over time.
    – Evolution has been observed in nature and laboratories.
    -Evolutionary theory explains
    the mechanisms of evolution (the fact).
    – Evolutionary theory is the cornerstone of the biological sciences and without it nothing in nature makes any sense at all.
    “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
    Isaac Asimov

  21. Robert Giroux says:

    A scientific theory is not a proven truth.
    It is a model based on observed facts that can make predictions
    which have been also been observed to be true.
    A theory is disproven when a prediction is observably incorrect, and then the model is changed when people understand why the prediction was wrong.
    That’s the beauty of science – it never asserts that it is right and proven –
    and is therefore always open to correction.
    Science is the sum of all knowledge about the world we live in.
    Science is a processus because it is always in permanent evolution,
    today’s knowledges being the starting point for those of tomorrow
    while keeping in mind that knowing everything will never be achieved.
    Science questions, studies, experiment and proposes theories that are based on hypothesis that turned out to be exact and that we can reproduce.
    When new informations contradict science,
    it wipes the blackboard clean and starts anew!
    Science is about processus and methodology.
    It investigates, experiments and posits theories based on evidence.
    Theories explain facts , they do not prove them in definitive manner.

  22. Robert Giroux says:

    The creation of life on earth (or anywhere else in the Universe for that matter!)
    has nothing to do with the theory of Evolution …
    That’s the only selling point of Creationists… Ask them … They should know

    Evolution is only concerned with the origins of the multitude of SPECIES that flourish on earth and it is a theory that traces all species back through time to a common ancestor for all living things.
    (Every life form on earth is based upon and uses proteins that are built with the same ten amino acids, in marvelous diversity of combination. We are no different, we use the same ten. There are many other amino acids, but all living things use just those ten. This is quiet evidence for “common descent”, from common ancestors.)
    The theory also posits a naturalistic mechanism or engine that drives change from simplicity to complexity and to the emergence of species. That engine is natural selection.

    Evolution is not concerned with the emergence of life itself.

    Abiogenesis is a fascinating subject for sure
    but not one that we have an established theory on yet.
    Instead, it remains at the frontier of knowledge and exists
    at the moment only at the level of numerous hypotheses.
    If and when an established theory of abiogenesis does emerge it will certainly play a role in the overall story of life told by evolutionary theory but how, as yet, is still to be seen.
    In short, we don’t know how life originally emerged.
    However, just because we don’t know something in science,
    it doesn’t follow that we should fall into the trap of saying, “goddidit”.
    This is simply the ‘god of the gaps’ argument where we reach
    for supernatural explanations to fill gaps in our knowledge.
    The problem with the god of the gaps, as the history of science has shown,
    is that those gaps keep getting smaller.
    It should also be noted that never, not once, in the history of science has a scientific discovery concluded that “it was magic” or “it was supernatural”.

    “Who created God?” … Nobody!
    He just popped up out of … thin… nothing!
    I mean… He literally exploded on the spot!
    It should have been called “Big Bang Dude” right here …
    there and … everywhere but since there was nobody to hear it at the time,
    we settled (much much later on) on … OH… MY… GOD! … WTF !!

    “At the start of Creation,
    everything was dark… There was nothing.
    Then God said: *Let there be light*…
    There was still nothing but it could be seen.” – Pierre Dac

    • Brien Doyle says:

      Claim a god – you must prove that god!

      Unless you have Science degrees – do not refer to the sciences!

  23. Lee sonoflaw says:

    Our taxpayer money is going to political Hacks and people who support lies. Even the most Christian person in the world, the POPE supports the scientific method. We should demand that OUR taxes should not be used to pay this mans salary.

  24. Brien Doyle says:

    This is ‘fake’ news on Tuck’s part!

    These people need to be arrested for these public lies!!
    and for the child abuse as a result of these lies…!

Comments are closed.