Another major misintepretation of evolution is that it is a random process, which it is not at all.
Sorry for the quotefest, but there's lots to reply to and I don't want to flood the thread with one post for each reply.
It is the simplest way of explaining why life looks the way it does, and the fossil record bears it out, and we can still see natural selection in action today, making species look different from the way they did fifty or a hundred years ago.
Sorry for the quotefest, but there's lots to reply to and I don't want to flood the thread with one post for each reply.
No-one is forced to believe anything they don't want to. The question is what should children be taught in science class. Answer: science!Dann661 said:I do not think everyone should be forced to believe in evolution, if people don't want to, why make them?
I'll let creationism be taught in science class just as soon as you start teaching evolution in church.Fbuh said: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.
Actually it is only genes that are selected for and against, and the perceived evolution of individuals and groups stems from that. Of course selection as we know it couldn't happen without a group, but that is not the same as saying it is groups that evolve.megaman24681012 said:Individuals do not evolve, the group does.
Natural selection says "things which are better at reproducing will reproduce more." So it's nothing more than a tautology; it is true by definition. I do not understand how anyone could disagree with it. Furthermore, "traits are passed down hereditarily." The case for that assertion is fairly strong (kids look like their parents, and with DNA we can literally observe how this works). That's all it is. And evolution, then, is the theory that the living things we see in the world today have arrived at their present state by natural selection.Flac00 said: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.
It is the simplest way of explaining why life looks the way it does, and the fossil record bears it out, and we can still see natural selection in action today, making species look different from the way they did fifty or a hundred years ago.
This.Sleekit said:its worth noting that the ignorance surrounding science subjects like this and general anti-intellectualism is seriously harming Americas economic strength.
Pretty sure we do not teach intelligent design in science class.cdstephens said:As far as I know Europe has similar religious hindrances, though Catholic instead of Protestant based.
Or 'guess'. Or 'wish'.Speakercone said:if it can't be tested or observed, it isn't even a hypothesis. Maybe 'assertion' or 'idea' is closer to the mark.
And the religious are predisposed to understand it that way as they are so used to making wild guesses about the nature of the universe.Deschamps said: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.
Imagine yourself as a puddle of water in a depression in the ground. You are saying "how unlikely it is that this depression in the ground is just the right shape for me." The Earth suits us very well because it is where we developed. If we happened to develop on another planet, then that planet would suit us just as well.kouriichi said:The chances of our planet being in perfect distance of the sun to have constant liquid water on the surface, have life develop on it from thoughtless chains of atoms, to develop the perfect oxygen atmosphere
Your argument that the world as we see it is so unlikely that it can only have been created by God, can just as easily apply to God himself. What are the chances that God, an infinitely fantastical entity, sits here today? Probability doesn't work as an argument in either case.kouriichi said:What are the chances we, HUMANS sit here to day?
Like the man who thinks the images on his TV screen are created by fairies, until he has it all explained to him, radio signals, image encoding, modulation, liquid crystal displays. Then he says OK, I understand it all now, but surely there are still one or two fairies in there somewhere.Levski7 said:Looks like you're so close to accepting the laws of nature and evolution but are too scared to let go of a god to make the whole thing explainable to yourself.Dann661 said:I think God guided evolution
No, the word evolve simply means for one thing to develop from another, through some process. It comes from the Latin evolvere, meaning to unfold from. It is only through the misunderstanding that evolution is a process of improvement that evolve has recently come to imply improvement.The Random One said:The word Evolution implies something gets better.