The misinterpretation of evolution

[RobotZombieNinja]

I will start off by saying I am no scientist. However, I have noticed that almost everywhere (including here on the Escapist) many people do not understand evolution. This not just simple missteps like accidentally involving use and disuse into your arguments, but major misinterpretations. But this is not the problem, simple misunderstanding and misinterpretations are not somehow horrible offenses. However this has lead to a problem.
These misinterpretations have now lead to a whole culture of people who not only refuse to believe in evolution, but also use their misinterpretations to fuel their arguments. An example of this run amok by ignorants is "Darwinism" (which is an extremely annoying name as Darwin had nothing to do with the theory), which was really just and excuse to "prove" racism. A modern example is half the population of the United States (or less since I have not checked recent polls). That's right, around 50% of the population of the United States does not believe in evolution, and that is sad. Especially since the scientific theory has undergone so much criticism and a constant wave of evidence, that it has become almost completely infallible. And yet people still live ignorant of it as they have been misinformed about evolution.
This all comes down to a single point. Why and how is this happening? Is it because our media seems to commonly ignore facts? Is it because people jump onto bandwagons just to get away from the "norm" of evolution? Is it because our public schools have failed to teach adequate science in the classroom? Is it because of the rise of Creationism and Intelligent design (which are the same exact thing) has been corrupting our science classes and media? I would just like to hear other people's opinions on this.

I don't care that much.
Evolution is obviously true, and creationism is obviously true.
Anyone who doesn't juxtapose them is an ignoramous.

 

[BrassButtons]

With the amount of people who are mislead / willfully ignorant about current events and the state of the world they live in, educating them on things that might have happened hundreds of millions of years ago shouldn't be a priority. IMO, all it provides is intellectual masturbation for no real gain.

Understanding evolution is kinda important for things like medicine.

 

[R0cklobster]

Intelligent design is still a possible theory, as is the theory of evolution

The 'theory' in "Intelligent design is a theory" simply means an idea. The 'theory' in 'theory of evolution' means a scientific theory. The two are not interchangeable. Intelligent Design, as it is currently described, is incapable of meeting the requirements necessary to be a scientific hypothesis, let alone a theory. It has zero supporting evidence and makes no testable predictions. It is not science, and should not be treated as an equal to the scientific theory of evolution. If someone wants to believe in ID that it their choice, but treating it as an equal to evolution is a serious misrepresentation of the facts.

+1

Well said.

 

[Flac00]

snip

I don't care that much.
Evolution is obviously true, and creationism is obviously true.
Anyone who doesn't juxtapose them is an ignoramous.

I do agree, I probably would have said that at the start of the post, but I don't want to offend people

 

[Cpu46]

Just a nitpick: It is the Hypothesis of Intelligent design.

It's not even that. It doesn't provide a mechanism and makes no testable predictions. It's an idea that wants to be a hypothesis when it grows up.

I was actually wondering whether it was even a hypothesis or not for that very reason when I was typing the post. I decided yes mostly because the post was already mostly written.

 

[Flac00]

I am a Catholic, but I still know that evolution exists, and I agree that it is appalling that most people don't don't know about it. However, I do not think everyone should be forced to believe in evolution, if people don't want to, why make them? Intelligent design is still a possible theory, as is the theory of evolution, I think God guided evolution but, I'm not going to go around and try and make people teach this in schools everywhere.

I don't think it should be forced onto people, however I do have a problem with Intelligent Design (and Creationism as they are the same). My problem is not with their existence but they idea that they are an acceptable scientific alternative to evolution. THEY ARE NOT. They are an acceptable alternative to evolution from a philosophical point of view, but not a scientific point of view. They are not science, thus they are not scientific theory. The reason they are not science is because they do not offer the main reason for the existence of science, evidence. All that exists for Intelligent Design is instead attempts to disprove Evolution, and no proof for the idea of ID itself.

 

[Dinwatr]

With the amount of people who are mislead / willfully ignorant about current events and the state of the world they live in, educating them on things that might have happened hundreds of millions of years ago shouldn't be a priority.

Really? I guess you've never heard the phrase "The past is key to the present". I mean, many people are worried about global warming. Guess what? The world has warmed up before--we can look to the past to see what happened, and predict what WILL happen. Similarly, the world has gone through mass extinctions before (not the same thing). Again, we can look to the past to see what's coming. Of course, doing so forces us to recognize that the past existed, which is always tricky. Most people prefer fairy tales.

Evolution is obviously true, and creationism is obviously true.

I've yet to see any evidence for creationism. I mean, like ID it first needs to define what it's talking about--which God, how, when, etc. Until it does that, it's not actually saying anything. Worse, it proposes a supernatural explanation for things without any support (and in fact most people take as support the things they're trying to explain--circular reasoning). If you don't believe in a god, Creationism cannot convince you. Every one of the original researchers in evolutionary theory was a Creationist (there was nothing else to be), and many had religious training.

 

[Deschamps]

However, I do not think everyone should be forced to believe in evolution, if people don't want to, why make them?

Belief has no place in matters of science. If something can be demonstrated to be true, then you either accept it as truth, or you are a fool.

I think some problems stem from calling evolution a theory. To people who don't understand it, it gives the impression that there's still a good chance it could be wrong. While there are missing links here and there, evolution has a pretty sound case.

 

[Flac00]

First of all, your run on sentences make an extremely incoherent argument. Second of all, you seem to have some of your facts bass-ackwards. You seem to believe that evolution was the lead idea the whole time, and that these filthy newcomers of Intelligetn Design are invading. It is actually quite the opposite. Evolution is an idea that is barely even a hundred years old, while Creationism has had free reign for thousands of years.

I think that it is fair to say that you seem to need to brush up on some things first before you go crying wolf on other people. Also, it is fair that if one idea is taught in the classroom, then another idea must be taught as well. People need to see all of the choices, and then decide for themselves what they want to believe is true. There is no reason why Creationism nor evolution can be taught simulataneously.

Sorry, grammar is not my strong suit, then again this is the internet and expecting pitch perfect english is never going to happen (run on sentence).

Ironically, yes you are right that Creationism has had free reign for thousands of years, it is just a manifestation of religion. Creationism is religion wrapped up in different packaging.

So sure, Creationism may be taught in classrooms, but specific classrooms. Creationism should not exist in a science class as it is not science. It not only lacks the evidence to prove itself, but also follows a thought processes that is neither provable nor disprovable. Instead of believing in it because of irrefutable evidence, it is believed in through faith. Faith is the territory of religion, not of science. These are not two comparable ideas. Evolution is a scientific theory, Creationism is an idea. They cannot be taught simultaneously as they do not inhabit the same area of education. They may be able to be taught in Philosophy, but that is completely different.

 

[hannan4mitch]

Which "misinterpretation" are we talking about? Evolution looks easy when viewed at a metaphorical distance, but upon closer examination, is quite baffling and complex enough to merit it's own sub-discipline of Biology. As previously stated, average/above average joe's (like everybody here, including me, who isn't a Biologist) aren't going to understand the entirety of Darwin's work unless they actively study or research into it. That is why many people "misinterpret" evolution.

 

[Drops a Sweet Katana]

My knowledge of evolution mostly stems from Spore. Dunno how accurate the game is, but it could explain things a little, even if it leaves the question as to why we cannot grow extra limbs at will.

Despite how much I love that game, to say Spore depicts an accurate representation of natural evolution pretty much spits in the face of the theory. What Spore depicts is 'intelligent design'. I would suggest going on YouTube and searching for Potholer54's '...Made Easy' series. It's concise, pretty well presented and, best of all, simple (because holy shit evolution is not as straight forward as people think).

Here are three of his videos dealing with evolution:
Natural Selection: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q76jw0ZB9hA
The Theory of Evolution: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w57_P9DZJ4&feature=related
Human Evolution: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCayG4IIOEQ&feature=related

I would also recommend QualiaSoup's videos on evolution, natural selection and other related topics. He does a great job with Flash to present everything in a very slick and approachable style, and he covers some other really deep topics as well if you do so desire to check them out.
Here is his video on evolution: http://youtu.be/vss1VKN2rf8

I hope these help you better understand, or at least get on the right path to understanding evolution. And feel free to ask questions. It's a very good way to understand just about anything. There should at least be someone who can give you the answers to your questions.

 

[Flac00]

I thought this was going to be a thread about the "missing link" (between chimps and humans, of course) misconception. I'm slightly disappointed that it's just a thread about a lack of belief in evolution. The main problem is it's teaching as an alternative to Creationism is not mandatory (and probably won't be for some time to come :/).

I honestly thought the "missing link" argument had long been proven wrong because of limiting factors: Anthropologists may not have found that missing link yet as there is so much of the earth to search through. Also because evolution takes so much time and so many generations of species, every generation would technically be the "missing link". Finally, I think we have already found that "missing link" between humans and great apes.

 

[Avatar Roku]

However, I do not think everyone should be forced to believe in evolution, if people don't want to, why make them?

Belief has no place in matters of science. If something can be demonstrated to be true, then you either accept it as truth, or you are a fool.

I think some problems stem from calling evolution a theory. To people who don't understand it, it gives the impression that there's still a good chance it could be wrong. While there are missing links here and there, evolution has a pretty sound case.

Exactly. People don't understand what a scientific theory really is. I've talked to people who thought that, if Evolution was really as rock-steady as it is, it would be a Law. It does not work like that.

A theory does not become a law. They describe two different things. For (extremely simplified) example:

Law of Gravity: Things fall. Period. Immutable.

Theory of Gravity: Things fall because...

I always hate having to explain that. And not only because the only example I can easily use is not a very good one.

Which "misinterpretation" are we talking about? Evolution looks easy when viewed at a metaphorical distance, but upon closer examination, is quite baffling and complex enough to merit it's own sub-discipline of Biology. As previously stated, average/above average joe's (like everybody here, including me, who isn't a Biologist) aren't going to understand the entirety of Darwin's work unless they actively study or research into it. That is why many people "misinterpret" evolution.

While it's true that we all most likely, on some level, misinterpret evolution, some people really do do so more than others. The people who take issue with evolution because they believe it says that their ancestors were monkeys come to mind.

 

[Flac00]

I find your lack of respect for Darwin disappointing. While the idea of evolution was around before him, and the field has moved on since the impact of his work on the subject and the insights he had are the very foundation of the science. His extremely limited knowledge about the mechanics of genetics and inheritance do cause him to make the wrong conclusions sometimes, but the meat of his theory stands today.

Also, it is fair that if one idea is taught in the classroom, then another idea must be taught as well. People need to see all of the choices, and then decide for themselves what they want to believe is true. There is no reasone why Creationism nor evolution can be taught simulataneously.

Not when one idea stands clearly over the others. It is in the halls of academia that hypothesis and evidence are debated, and not in the schoolroom. There is little time given to the teaching of Science as it is. The "teach the controversy" argument is an appeal to peoples' sense of democracy and fair play, but it doesn't really apply here. The same argument could be made for the teaching of Phrenology as science, or Geocentricism.

I didn't think I did not give Darwin respect. I maybe should have referenced him more, but I'm not sure how else I could have given him respect.
The ideas of "Darwinism" had nothing to do with Darwin at all, he did not create the theory nor did he support it (especially since it was created after his death). Instead "Darwinism" was itself a misinterpretation of the theory of evolution.

 

[TFielding]

I'm a Crevolutionist. I believe that God likes dominoes and set up the entire universe to play through this. So, you can't really put Creationism at odds with Evolution. I think the problem is that people do put it as Evolution vs. Creationism.

 

[Flac00]

First off in a thread like this you should explain to everyone what the proper definition of evolution is if you don't want to cause any further confusion.

Personally i don't experience much trouble with people not understanding evolution. I've yet to encounter anyone who wholeheartedly believes that god created us as we are and that nothing else has played a part since the dawn of time.

I'd say it's just a religious issue and leave it at that. Plain and simple.

I'd say to get a definition from a biology teacher or find a reputable website to find the definition. Any definition I would give would be either too complex (and I honestly lack the patience) or so simplistic it would be factually incorrect.

 

[TheDooD]

snip

In WarHammer40k the Emperor of Mankind tried his hardest to force people to understand science and logic is the only way. He tried peaceful methods in the past yet they didn't work. He knew the religious views, ignorant mindsets only lead to war and pointless conflicts. Too bad the Chaos Gods screwed him over and now his people are doing what he fought hard to prevent.

If the Emperor succeed humans would have really evolved in the years after his "death". Yet because the chaos gods screwed him over humans became extremely xenophobic, they are even scared of new and outside technology. Basically I think people should put logic and facts in front of "faith". If you have faith in oneself you can achieve anything you want. Being afraid and waiting for higher powers do something for you is only holding people back.

 

[Necromancer1991]

I understand and embrace the idea of evolution, the main reason people draw the line is when the topic shifts to us, "sure birds evolved from dinosaurs, alright I could maybe see that..people evolved from apes, OMG EVOLUTION IZ TEH DEVILZ!!!1!". Even than evolution isn't just limited to nature (Technology, Robotics, etc) or even the phsyical world for that matter (Society, Philosophy, Culture, etc), but people (Especially those with well-established beliefs) have a hard time accepting new ideas and what not, now I'm not saying that having a well-defined set of cultural beliefs gets in the way of change, it's just that many people use religion (And similar concepts) and what not as a absolute compass and anything that questions the accuracy of said compass is irreperably false.

 

[Avatar Roku]

I'm a Crevolutionist. I believe that God likes dominoes and set up the entire universe to play through this. So, you can't really put Creationism at odds with Evolution. I think the problem is that people do put it as Evolution vs. Creationism.

While I do believe in Evolution and not at all in Creationism, I think you are absolutely right. People really do make a false dichotomy between the two. Theoretically speaking, there's no reason that God couldn't have put all the observed scientific processes in motion. Some religious people I've seen act like science will put an end to religion, but they shouldn't even be in competition! One is the how, the other is the why.

However, I do not think everyone should be forced to believe in evolution, if people don't want to, why make them?

Belief has no place in matters of science. If something can be demonstrated to be true, then you either accept it as truth, or you are a fool.

I think some problems stem from calling evolution a theory. To people who don't understand it, it gives the impression that there's still a good chance it could be wrong. While there are missing links here and there, evolution has a pretty sound case.

I think we should make it a law so all the creationists can either shut the fuck up or make better, and possibly more hilarious, arguments.

It'll be swell.

See my above post (#33). Theories do not become Laws.