Miss USA contestants. Evolution taught in schools?

[Long Way to Go]

---

Members don't see this ad.

So... what's wrong with teaching evolution as a theory (GRAVITY IS NOT RELATED TO EVOLUTION WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!?!?! /rant)? And Creationism as another (If you don't believe in God, you can't in any way be forced to believe if it's fact or not. Reading the Bible forwards and backwards will not suddenly enlighten you)? What's wrong with giving people a choice, or a chance to rationalize. I could continue and write an essay-length debate but it's 3am.

Bash on, dear fellow ignorants, bash on. I'm glad since you all agree with each other, you've taken the freedom to congregate here and say *some* of thee stupidest claims I've ever heard. Again, I could write out a coherent argument but my eyes are drooping and brain hurts because, previous to this, I read a troll thread. I wish I could leave this post without stating any sides but by reading my sig I know many of you will jump to conclusions, and that can't be helped. Ah well--bash on.

The reason we don't teach intelligent design in biology is the same reason we don't teach Ptolemy's geocentric model of the solar system in anything but a historical sense.

I take it you've never heard of "teach the controversy" or "evolution as a fact and theory"? Everything you stated has been rejected by the scientific community, the educational community, and the federal judiciary of the United States.

 

[eugenierose]

awe well, You can't be smart and pretty

Beg to differ.

My main concern after watching this video isn't whether a bunch of beauty queens think evolution is a valid scholarly topic but the fact that 3/4 of these girls completely lack the verbal faculties to express a coherent argument one way or the other. Too bad--I've met plenty of pageant girls who are perfectly intelligent. Seems like the Miss USA competition hand picks the stupid ones who'll be good for a few dumb quotes.

I noticed that too. Was that a practice run?

 

[RadioCure]

So... what's wrong with teaching evolution as a theory (GRAVITY IS NOT RELATED TO EVOLUTION WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!?!?! /rant)? And Creationism as another (If you don't believe in God, you can't in any way be forced to believe if it's fact or not. Reading the Bible forwards and backwards will not suddenly enlighten you)? What's wrong with giving people a choice, or a chance to rationalize. I could continue and write an essay-length debate but it's 3am.

Creationism is not a scientific theory because there is no scientific evidence to support it. The word "theory" in science is different than how we use it in everyday language; hypotheses are made from observations, and the explanations that arise from further study and investigation are called theories. Theories never "graduate" into facts in science. This is why the theory of gravity is brought up so often as an example in this discussion. Although we're all sure that gravity is real, the explanation of how it works is still called a theory. When people say evolution is "just a theory," it shows that they don't know what a scientific theory is.

If creationism is to move from being a hypothesis (some have even questioned whether it could be called one) to a theory, evidence needs to be presented in scientific literature and pass the critical eye of peer review, just as evolution did when it was first rejected at large by the scientific community. Until then, teaching creationism is no different than teaching that raindrops are God's tears as an alternate "theory" of weather.

Apply what you said regarding creationism to other mythological explanations for natural phenomena: "What's wrong with giving people a choice, or a chance to rationalize?" Science is for science class and religion and mythology are for religion and mythology classes. It's simply ridiculous to teach non-scientific ideas in a science class, such as every supernatural explanation for how a lightning bolt is made.

Bash on, dear fellow ignorants, bash on. I'm glad since you all agree with each other, you've taken the freedom to congregate here and say *some* of thee stupidest claims I've ever heard. Again, I could write out a coherent argument but my eyes are drooping and brain hurts because, previous to this, I read a troll thread. I wish I could leave this post without stating any sides but by reading my sig I know many of you will jump to conclusions, and that can't be helped. Ah well--bash on.

When you get some more sleep, there are many of us who would probably be interested in knowing what ideas we're ignorant of, and what exactly was said that was so stupid. It seems a bit unfair to attack and insult without explanation.

Edit: The link posted by Long Way to Go regarding evolution as fact and theory is a great explanation of scientific terms, and explains the possibility that creationism could not possibly be a scientific theory.

 

[Camy99]

You mean, besides the fact that evolution is based on the real world and creationism is based on mythology and magic? Why don't we teach that Zeus is responsible for lightening while we're at it? That's just as realistic as creationism.

And the point wasn't that gravity is related to evolution, it's that gravity is considered a scientific theory just like evolution is. The scientific definition of the word is very different from the typical definition, yet creationists try to apply the typical since it makes it sound like you can dismiss evolution simply because scientists use the word theory.

...That would be your, oh what's it called, opinion? And the funny thing is you are thought Greek Mythology in school, granted not as truth but at least students know what some people believed in. Not in biological base, but it's better than being completely dismissed and ridiculed. Greek Mythology is probably taken more seriously than Creationism because teachers, or whoever runs all this, think the world will end or something if they raise a Christian-based scientist. Oh dear no.. -_-"

"The reason we don't teach intelligent design in biology is the same reason we don't teach Ptolemy's geocentric model of the solar system in anything but a historical sense."

Ptolemy's has been clearly disproven. Intelligent Design/Creationism has just been tossed aside because it can't be argued using the scientific method. It's like saying because a ruler can't be applied to something, it has no length. Yet there are parts of evolution, especially Macro, that can't be scientifically questioned because they can't be reproduced. But since people have decided it's either that or what the Bible says, we're going to go with what we think, teach it to enough people that they grow up thinking the same thing and no one questions anything.

I take it you've never heard of "teach the controversy" or "evolution as a fact and theory"? Everything you stated has been rejected by the scientific community, the educational community, and the federal judiciary of the United States.

I have actually. That just all comes down to who we bow down to for the future of the children.
From the article: McGill University Professor Brian Alters, an expert in the creation-evolution controversy, is quoted in an article published by the NIH as stating that "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution"[20] whereas intelligent design has been rejected by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community.
Yes... because he has met 99.9% of scientist. Oh, does nobody take statistics anymore! Just because someone with a big title next to their name says something doesn't make it automatically right. And nothing frustrates me than people not attempting to think things through on their own without saying "Well that important guy says..."
Solely teaching Evolution in schools as fact is no better than those parents that basically force Christianity on their kids as fact--eventually they have to decide on their own.


PS. I apologize for any overt sarcasm--I just woke up. I should pick better times to post...

 

[Shizz]

I really don't mind when these girls overtly disagree with evidence and logic, but it pains me when future (and current) doctors choose to ignore it.

 

[RadioCure]

...That would be your, oh what's it called, opinion? And the funny thing is you are thought Greek Mythology in school, granted not as truth but at least students know what some people believed in. Not in biological base, but it's better than being completely dismissed and ridiculed. Greek Mythology is probably taken more seriously than Creationism because teachers, or whoever runs all this, think the world will end or something if they raise a Christian-based scientist. Oh dear no.. -_-"

In what school is Greek mythology taught in science class? I learned about classical mythology as well as several current world religions in my high school social studies classes, but that isn't the issue. If you're talking about creationism being discussed in humanities classes, that isn't (and shouldn't be) a problem; creation stories are widely taught in schools currently and are important parts of world history and culture.

Ptolemy's has been clearly disproven. Intelligent Design/Creationism has just been tossed aside because it can't be argued using the scientific method. It's like saying because a ruler can't be applied to something, it has no length. Yet there are parts of evolution, especially Macro, that can't be scientifically questioned because they can't be reproduced. But since people have decided it's either that or what the Bible says, we're going to go with what we think, teach it to enough people that they grow up thinking the same thing and no one questions anything.

If you agree that creationism isn't scientific, then why do you want it taught in science class? I'm not sure that's what you're arguing after your last paragraph, though.

Macroevolution is actually falsifiable in many ways. For example, hominid fossils found in the Cretaceous (or any other geologic era mix-up) would count strongly against it, as would some type of genetic or biological mechanism that could be shown to prevent mutations from accumulating. I'll give you a bigger one that would take longer to explain if you want. You don't have to directly and currently observe something to know that it has happened.

I have actually. That just all comes down to who we bow down to for the future of the children. Brian Alters, an expert in the creation-evolution controversy,"99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution"[20] whereas intelligent design has been rejected by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community.[/I]
Yes... because he has met 99.9% of scientist. Oh, does nobody take statistics anymore! Just because someone with a big title next to their name says something doesn't make it automatically right. And nothing frustrates me than people not attempting to think things through on their own without saying "Well that important guy says..."
Solely teaching Evolution in schools as fact is no better than those parents that basically force Christianity on their kids as fact--eventually they have to decide on their own.

I don't know for about the 99.9% figure, but the overwhelming majority of the scientific community does accept evolution. It gets even larger when you consider only life science and biological scientists, which makes sense anyway (you wouldn't take a geologist's opinion on theories in astrophysics very seriously). Citing some "important guy's" opinion as evidence in a debate is a logical fallacy, but the scientific consensus is an extremely important factor in science and dictates, more than anything else, what is taught in science classes. Without the scientific consensus, modern medicine would be speculative quackery. Science classes teach only evolution because its the only explanation for biodiversity with any significant support in the scientific community.

If you admit creationism is not scientific, and if we discard the scientific consensus, how is teaching creationism any different than teaching the Zeus theory of lightning? How do we decide what gets taught? There are fringe and minority disagreements on nearly every single topic in science. Did you know there are still geo-centrists? Are you ready to teach that one in science class as well?

 

[Web MD]

Believing in evolution and being religious are not mutually exclusive stances, it would just require some independent thought. Back on topic, why don't they make the contestants debate one another for our amusement? Pretty sure it would blow my mind

 

[Halcyon03]

...That would be your, oh what's it called, opinion? And the funny thing is you are thought Greek Mythology in school, granted not as truth but at least students know what some people believed in. Not in biological base, but it's better than being completely dismissed and ridiculed. Greek Mythology is probably taken more seriously than Creationism because teachers, or whoever runs all this, think the world will end or something if they raise a Christian-based scientist. Oh dear no.. -_-"


Ptolemy's has been clearly disproven. Intelligent Design/Creationism has just been tossed aside because it can't be argued using the scientific method. It's like saying because a ruler can't be applied to something, it has no length. Yet there are parts of evolution, especially Macro, that can't be scientifically questioned because they can't be reproduced. But since people have decided it's either that or what the Bible says, we're going to go with what we think, teach it to enough people that they grow up thinking the same thing and no one questions anything.


I have actually. That just all comes down to who we bow down to for the future of the children.
From the article: McGill University Professor Brian Alters, an expert in the creation-evolution controversy, is quoted in an article published by the NIH as stating that "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution"[20] whereas intelligent design has been rejected by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community.
Yes... because he has met 99.9% of scientist. Oh, does nobody take statistics anymore! Just because someone with a big title next to their name says something doesn't make it automatically right. And nothing frustrates me than people not attempting to think things through on their own without saying "Well that important guy says..."
Solely teaching Evolution in schools as fact is no better than those parents that basically force Christianity on their kids as fact--eventually they have to decide on their own.


PS. I apologize for any overt sarcasm--I just woke up. I should pick better times to post...

This is an interesting time in American history, where we are witnessing a paradigm shift as to how we synthesize information. Evolution is elegant in that it predicts, has a variety of functional applications, and most fully explains the complexity we see here on earth. Rather than automatically ascribing everything we do not understand to supernatural phenomenon, the scientific community exhibits patience by continually updating and revising theories and understanding according to the best available data. Most rational individuals find intelligent design ludicrous due to inherent lack of any evidence, the subjectivity as to who this esoteric designer actually is, and the introduction of an even more complex (and unsubstantiated) variable, being God/Allah/Wotan/etc. Recently, Elizabeth Hasselback exposed her views regarding evolution by stating the perfection of a baby and the human eye. To attribute only that which we find beautiful (there is an evolutionary explanation for why we do so) to an intelligent designer without mentioning the more numerous cases of mistakes (for which there is also a evo. explanation) is why creationists/IDers are perceived as nutty. For a designer to make babies with Harlequin's disease or Anencephaly, an eye with retinoblastoma, or one of millions of defects, I question how intelligent is this designer? The onus is on you and the ID community to produce evidence that can be verifiably tested, or find some fossilized rabbits from Pre-Cambrian strata.

 

[rhesuspieces]

This thread is going exactly where I expected it to go. Ah SDN, you comfort me with your predictability.

 

[EgotiStick]

This is an interesting time in American history, where we are witnessing a paradigm shift as to how we synthesize information. Evolution is elegant in that it predicts, has a variety of functional applications, and most fully explains the complexity we see here on earth. Rather than automatically ascribing everything we do not understand to supernatural phenomenon, the scientific community exhibits patience by continually updating and revising theories and understanding according to the best available data. Most rational individuals find intelligent design ludicrous due to inherent lack of any evidence, the subjectivity as to who this esoteric designer actually is, and the introduction of an even more complex (and unsubstantiated) variable, being God/Allah/Wotan/etc. Recently, Elizabeth Hasselback exposed her views regarding evolution by stating the perfection of a baby and the human eye. To attribute only that which we find beautiful (there is an evolutionary explanation for why we do so) to an intelligent designer without mentioning the more numerous cases of mistakes (for which there is also a evo. explanation) is why creationists/IDers are perceived as nutty. For a designer to make babies with Harlequin's disease or Anencephaly, an eye with retinoblastoma, or one of millions of defects, I question how intelligent is this designer? The onus is on you and the ID community to produce evidence that can be verifiably tested, or find some fossilized rabbits from Pre-Cambrian strata.

laughably tl;dr

Evolution is a process, a demonstrable process. You can believe it happens or not, but if you choose to think of it as a "theory"... well you might as well start arguing about the "theory of addition and subtraction" or the "theory that taco bell is serving actual beef"

edit: Northeastern girls, Ms NM, and Ms CA for the Fing win god damn

 

[Web MD]

I want to go back to talking about the beauty pageant contestants

 

[flatearth22]

So... what's wrong with teaching evolution as a theory (GRAVITY IS NOT RELATED TO EVOLUTION WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!?!?! /rant)? And Creationism as another (If you don't believe in God, you can't in any way be forced to believe if it's fact or not. Reading the Bible forwards and backwards will not suddenly enlighten you)? What's wrong with giving people a choice, or a chance to rationalize. I could continue and write an essay-length debate but it's 3am.

Bash on, dear fellow ignorants, bash on. I'm glad since you all agree with each other, you've taken the freedom to congregate here and say *some* of thee stupidest claims I've ever heard. Again, I could write out a coherent argument but my eyes are drooping and brain hurts because, previous to this, I read a troll thread. I wish I could leave this post without stating any sides but by reading my sig I know many of you will jump to conclusions, and that can't be helped. Ah well--bash on.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

does anyone actually understand what the hell camy99 is saying? i read about 2 lines and my eyeballs melted. so i'm blind now. thanks.

 

[EgotiStick]

does anyone actually understand what the hell camy99 is saying? i read about 2 lines and my eyeballs melted. so i'm blind now. thanks.

Hahaha. I had to look back up to see who that was. I didn't even read those posts because they just looked like pure hell.

I'm pissed Ms. Texas wasn't in the evolution vid. She was fine

 

[Web MD]

I wonder if some of these girls move to Idaho/dakotas/wyoming knowing they've got a better shot at making it or if that's waaaaaaay too much strategy

 

[Myuu]

So... what's wrong with teaching evolution as a theory (GRAVITY IS NOT RELATED TO EVOLUTION WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!?!?! /rant)? And Creationism as another (If you don't believe in God, you can't in any way be forced to believe if it's fact or not. Reading the Bible forwards and backwards will not suddenly enlighten you)? What's wrong with giving people a choice, or a chance to rationalize. I could continue and write an essay-length debate but it's 3am.

...how have you people on SDN managed to not come across this article?

 

[EgotiStick]

I wonder if some of these girls move to Idaho/dakotas/wyoming knowing they've got a better shot at making it or if that's waaaaaaay too much strategy

I believe Cali tried and failed twice in New Jersey before making it in CA (saw it on CNN).

Makes sense why she fits in with the educated group.

 

[FrkyBgStok]

i was going to say something "ranty" and valid, but this is a forum full of science junks, so I have nothing to contribute. I love debates like this, mainly because creationists fail so very hard.

 

[Kaustikos]

...how have you people on SDN managed to not come across this article?

So then...this is theory, too?

 

[orthomyxo]

I nearly raged when I heard the classic: "Evolution is only a theory." bit.

 

[alwaysaangel]

Believing in evolution and being religious are not mutually exclusive stances, it would just require some independent thought. Back on topic, why don't they make the contestants debate one another for our amusement? Pretty sure it would blow my mind

Yes, which is why the majority of religious leaders are ok with evolution. Including Catholic, Jehovas Witnesses and Mormons. Few groups are really so gung ho about literal interpretation of the bible anymore. It's just unrealistic.

Unfortunately, little groups and churches still push the literal interpretation and there are a lot of ignorant people out there. Frankly, I have no problem with people thinking God guiding the creation of the world but did so through evolution. And that is what many Christians believe. However, since that is a purely religious argument there is zero reason it should be taught in schools.

The people who truly worry me are the ones who never bothered to understand evolution at all. How do you disagree with something you don't even understand.

 

[AntiHouseMD]

alwaysangel put it perfectly. I'm Catholic, and I believe that evolution occurred as a result of God. Most of the Catholics that I know of don't make it a major issue. It's usually smaller churches that push a literal interpretation of the bible, but they are certainly in the minority.

On a more serious note, why are we debating replies by contestants in a BEAUTY pageant to this question? I doubt that most of the contestants would answer that way if it didn't match their background (notice most of the Southern contestants spoke against evolution). Still, I really don't understand why this is such a big thing. Oh well.

 

[MeowMeowCAT]

Yes, which is why the majority of religious leaders are ok with evolution. Including Catholic.

It's unfortunate that Christians, Catholics, etc. get such a bad name because of a couple of crazies, I guess that can be said for anything. But I remember seeing some statistic a while ago that said that most Christians/Catholics, I am bunching them together because in my opinion they kind of share the blame of this sort of stuff, are actually okay with the idea of evolution and a lot of scientific theories.

 

[AntiHouseMD]

It's unfortunate that Christians, Catholics, etc. get such a bad name because of a couple of crazies, I guess that can be said for anything. But I remember seeing some statistic a while ago that said that most Christians/Catholics, I am bunching them together because in my opinion they kind of share the blame of this sort of stuff, are actually okay with the idea of evolution and a lot of scientific theories.

I remember that even Pope John Paul II stated once that the Catholic Church accepted evolution as a process by God.

 

[Darwinism]

Intelligent Design/Creationism has just been tossed aside because it can't be argued using the scientific method.

If it cannot be argued using scientific methods, it doesn't exist. For additional opinion, see signature

 

[CuttingCorneas]

If it cannot be argued using scientific methods, it doesn't exist. For additional opinion, see signature

You have just won the thread, my friend.

 

[Longshanks]

So... what's wrong with teaching evolution as a theory (GRAVITY IS NOT RELATED TO EVOLUTION WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!?!?! /rant)? And Creationism as another (If you don't believe in God, you can't in any way be forced to believe if it's fact or not. Reading the Bible forwards and backwards will not suddenly enlighten you)? What's wrong with giving people a choice, or a chance to rationalize. I could continue and write an essay-length debate but it's 3am.

Bash on, dear fellow ignorants, bash on. I'm glad since you all agree with each other, you've taken the freedom to congregate here and say *some* of thee stupidest claims I've ever heard. Again, I could write out a coherent argument but my eyes are drooping and brain hurts because, previous to this, I read a troll thread. I wish I could leave this post without stating any sides but by reading my sig I know many of you will jump to conclusions, and that can't be helped. Ah well--bash on.

Evolution is taught as a theory, because that is what it is: a scientific theory. Creationism is not a scientific theory. It is haphazardly tossing aside all logic and reason in defiance of science, and therefore does not merit being taught in a classroom.

Sorry, but your belief in voodoo and mythology seems to have crashed your logic system.

 

[kami333]

Yes... because he has met 99.9% of scientist. Oh, does nobody take statistics anymore! Just because someone with a big title next to their name says something doesn't make it automatically right. And nothing frustrates me than people not attempting to think things through on their own without saying "Well that important guy says..."
Solely teaching Evolution in schools as fact is no better than those parents that basically force Christianity on their kids as fact--eventually they have to decide on their own.

Out of curiosity, how is it any different with the Creationism? Everything is based on "Well that important book says..."

Personally I'm all for teaching creationism as an alternative to evolution, but I think in that case we need to be fair and teach more than just the Judeo-Christian creation myth. I'm fairly partial to the Scientology one myself, I find it fairly plausible compared to some of the others. The Spider Woman from the Hopi one is good too, but I think we may need to get parental permission to teach the Japanese one, since there's a jeweled spear being thrust in and out.

 

[ovenmitts]

I'd like to post this little gem.


[YOUTUBE]qQdhMSEqhfg[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I'd like to post this little gem.


[YOUTUBE]qQdhMSEqhfg[/YOUTUBE]

I think she should try to teach chemistry next.

 

[gettheleadout]

I'd like to post this little gem.

I love that so much.

 

[samvillian]

I'd like to post this little gem.


[YOUTUBE]qQdhMSEqhfg[/YOUTUBE]

I think she's genius. If you used that tactic in debate, you win. There is no rebuttal for that.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I think she's genius. If you used that tactic in debate, you win. There is no rebuttal for that.

Bill Cosby, my friend, is by far a more potent tactic.

 

[CuttingCorneas]

does anyone actually understand what the hell camy99 is saying? i read about 2 lines and my eyeballs melted. so i'm blind now. thanks.

Well, your ability to be blinded by camy's post wasn't because of evolution, if that's what you're getting at. It was God's will, obvs.

 

[boggvir]

I don't understand something, what can it be?

Four people answer different ways:

A. I'm one with nature and it'll tell me how.
B. I don't know, let's try to find out.
C. God did it and the Bible said how.
D. Allah did it aside slightly differently than C cause the Qu'ran said how.



A gets high at a hippy commune, c & d get stab each other, B saves them by doing evil "science"

Thirty years later.....we now know how that something works.

A. Is still high but now has four STDs
B. Hey c & d, I've figured it out!
C. Kill him!
D. Do it!


The way of the world.

 

[chidoman]

.

 

[boggvir]

Im getting tired of these Religion vs Evolution threads

Religion = spiritual things = apples
Science = physical things = oranges

Yea I'm getting tired of religion interfering with science too.

 

[RadioCure]

Im getting tired of these Religion vs Evolution threads

Religion = spiritual things = apples
Science = physical things = oranges

The problem is that most religions claim some sort of supernatural force working currently or in the past on the natural world. Once gods start answering prayers, healing cancer, creating HIV, and helping people find their car keys, the discussion of religion is moved into a testable realm of science. It's not so black and white.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Im getting tired of these Religion vs Evolution threads

Religion = spiritual things = invisible apples
Science = physical things = oranges

Fix'd

 

[dmplz707]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IguW9xHd2qo[/youtube]

 

[CuttingCorneas]

[YOUTUBE]IguW9xHd2qo[/YOUTUBE]

1) Because wolves and foxes can totally reproduce. Anyone who says differently is a d@mn liberal.

2) Evolution just don't make any sense. How can an African American person evolve from a white person? We're different skeeyun.

 

[Shizz]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IguW9xHd2qo[/youtube]

Do you guys think that you could take over that class for a week and convince some of the kids of evolution?

OT: I would totes do that girl

 

[Darwinism]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IguW9xHd2qo[/youtube]

Powerful Stuff

 

[boggvir]

Where is the banana man? I refuse to read an evolution thread without banana man.

 

[Eric01]

[YOUTUBE]U2IisaNC4bE[/YOUTUBE]
Thought I'd put this video in for fun.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

2) Evolution just don't make any sense. How can an African American person evolve from a white person? We're different skeeyun.

That just made my day.

 

[chidoman]

.

 

[alwaysaangel]

Im probably the only one on this forum who has this viewpoint but whatever.

Several Christians in this thread have already mentioned that this is the most common Christian belief. Not sure why you would think it's so rare.

 

[MSU2009]

Is it really surprising that girls who were taught to conform to the standards of society via beauty pageants would do the same with their religious views. Come on, they weren't raised to think critically about serious issues.

I'm going back to enjoying them for what they're good at.. being pretty and silly.

/end sexist rant

 

[Dannyw]

Notice the intelligence increasing as they moved up the east coast?