Talk:Evolutionary biology careers

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Conservative, I noticed your removal of my addition to this article, saying that it needed a citation I was speaking from personal experience as someone studying ecology at university, which at my university is in the same department as evolutionary biology. It is of course difficult to cite personal experience on a wiki :)--DTSavage 00:45, 18 March 2013 (EDT)

When you said that many people do not go into the field for financial reasons, you were merely expressing an opinion. I meet people all the time who are studying a particular field in college and they appear to be in a dreamland. For example, in a few cases, I asked people in a friendly manner what the job prospects were in the field they were studying for and they were clueless. They were like a deer in the headlight. They had no idea what percentage of people that are eventually hired for the major they are studying for. Conservative 00:56, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
Yes, it was an opinion. However, it's an opinion based on the dozen or so people I know closely, and several dozen I am acquainted with, who are studying evolutionary biology. --DTSavage 01:00, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
DTSavage, I am skeptical of your claims - especially the claim related to the "several dozen" people. Conservative 01:07, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
You meet people, Cons.? And they have opinions? Oh dear! You had better close off this article...you have? Good. AlanE 01:06, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
AlanE, given the high rates of employment among college educated people routinely reported on the main page citing credible sources, my above comment/claim on the talk page is reasonable/plausible. Conservative 01:10, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
Never mind, Cons. AlanE 01:24, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
Alan and DTSavage, although my high school was not perfect, I believe I learned the difference between fact/opinion in high school. My university education then reinforced the dichotomy between the two. If someone wants to whine about their opinions not being included in the article, I am not going to be a sympathetic ear. Conservative 01:25, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
As I said...never mind Cons. AlanE 01:44, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
Just had a word with an old mate, knew him at NPWS (National Parks and Wildlife Service} He was a raptor expert. Has a PHD. Reckons "evolutionary biology" is a tautology. Reckons no one he ever met in his 40-odd year career in zoology believed in anything but evolution. Says if they're any good and can't find a job here, the Antarctic Base will have them. (That's 5 minutes away.) AlanE 02:22, 18 March 2013 (EDT)


Conservative could you please unlock the page so I can fix up the formatting. It looks utterly terrible in its current state! Dvergne 05:32, 18 March 2013 (EDT)

AlanE, ever see the movie Expelled? What happens to biologists who express dissent to Darwin? Second, have your friend challenge CMI to a debate on the 15 questions for evolutionists. They are in Australia. I have my doubts he would be willing to do this since Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates. Third, hundreds of scientists have publicly come out against evolution.[1] But even if it there were not science is not a voting booth it is based on proof and evidence. Plus, there are cases where the scientific consensus was wrong and the Bible was right.[2] Lastly, I suppose you can get a job in many fields if you are willing to move Alaska, Antarctica, Siberia, tundra, etc. But that doesn't tell me that there aren't a lot of unemployed people who are unwilling to do that. Conservative 13:13, 18 March 2013 (EDT)
"Hundreds" eh? Wow! AlanE 16:16, 18 March 2013 (EDT)

AlanE, so what did your friend say. Did he ask CMI scienttists for a debate or is he afraid of losing? By the way, has your friend come up with a workable chemical evolution scenario or did he fail there too? If he can't get through that chemical evolution gate, he is unable to get into the origin of species ballpark. :) Conservative 22:51, 18 March 2013 (EDT)

Um conservative, you still haven't unlocked the page for me to format it. Also a zoologist is bit different from an evolutionary biologist, although some stuff would interlink. Also I would have thought a fair few scientists would be jumping at the bit to get a job down in Antarctica. Dvergne 00:13, 19 March 2013 (EDT)
Dvergne, I don't see anything horrid about the formatting and you are not telling me why the formatting is horrid. Feel free to show me your improved formatting here: User: Conservative/Evolutionary biology careers. Thanks. Conservative 04:16, 19 March 2013 (EDT)

boring vs. glamorous - Engineering vs. life sciences - Boring and engineering wins!

I spoke to a friend of mine about this article. My friend says that biotech/bioengineering/human genome project is glamorous/exciting and is seen as world changing and a lot of people poured into the field. He said that engineering is seen as boring and it has a shortage of engineering PhDs. My friend says that sometimes it pays to be boring. He also said that often the best investments are boring too, but the flashy investments often fail (utility companies - boring and profitable, Facebook IPO was "exciting", but had problems).

Moral of the story: Liberals see evolutionary biology field as exciting, but "all the glitters is not gold". Evolutionary biology is fool's gold. :) Conservative 04:27, 19 March 2013 (EDT)

I'm sorry but engineering is far from boring. Please take that statement back immediately. Why is the page locked anyway ? It is hardly a controversial topic, why don't you unlock it?
It is not a controversial topic? Did you see this: http://conservapedia.com/Evolutionary_biology_careers#Conservative_commentary_on_evolutionary_biologists  ? Conservative 08:08, 19 March 2013 (EDT)
You seem to have validated my point just there mate. For one the references section is a bit of a mess, and the structure is all out of whack. More generally I see that all the articles you contribute to are pretty much all locked to stop others from contributing. The point of a wiki is to allow for a number of people and users to edit and improve articles, not just one person. Dvergne 09:20, 19 March 2013 (EDT)

Life Sciences = Evolutionary Biology?

I do question the apparent assumption that these are the same thing. The statistics cited are for careers in life sciences, which the analysis equates with evolutionary biology.

The rush to careers in "glamorous" areas was sparked by Genentech and other companies striving to develop therapies based on a study of the genome. Surely such work can be performed by a devout Christian who doesn't accept evolution. I would guess that most students of "genetic engineering" don't spend much time thinking about Darwinism. (As an aside, your quote from Dr. Marc Kirschner is actually bemoaning this fact.)

Couldn't the thesis of this article be strengthened by more targeted statistics on Darwinists? Or is it likely that most students of life sciences are Evolutionists? MelH 13:02, 19 March 2013 (EDT)

With many federal/state/province/local governments struggling with their budgets, I would think the hiring of evolutionary biologists at colleges/universities would shrink as a result. Plus, it would not surprise me if many of them were adjunct professors. The real biologists are more likely to get grants to perform useful work and be full time professors. Conservative 02:10, 20 March 2013 (EDT)
Personal tools