The misinterpretation of evolution

[Dasmaster]

At risk of sounding like a pussy, I feel as though the "Intelligent design" theory and the theory of evolution SHOULD be taught as theories with no bias on either side. I personally believe in science but I take the ground that says "Everyone has the right to believe whatever they want and I won't mind so long as their OPINION doesn't affect anyone else.

What annoys me more than anything is when schools say "Hey, we were all created by god and he loves you. But there's also this theory saying we came from fish. Isn't that crazy? Now suck the dick of the lord." I'm paraphrasing but this sort of thing happened at my primary school and just made me dislike religion further.

The problem with "Intelligent Design" is that its not a theory backed by evidence. Essentially it has nothing to teach aside from the assumption that an intelligent being is making everything. Its flagship "irreducible complexity" has been sunk long ago.

 

[Navvan]

At risk of sounding like a pussy, I feel as though the "Intelligent design" theory and the theory of evolution SHOULD be taught as theories with no bias on either side. I personally believe in science but I take the ground that says "Everyone has the right to believe whatever they want and I won't mind so long as their OPINION doesn't affect anyone else.

What annoys me more than anything is when schools say "Hey, we were all created by god and he loves you. But there's also this theory saying we came from fish. Isn't that crazy? Now suck the dick of the lord." I'm paraphrasing but this sort of thing happened at my primary school and just made me dislike religion further.

Intelligent design is a theory that argues that Irreducible complexity is evidence of a designer. That is to say because a biochemical system can not be reduced to functional parts that a designer must have put all the pieces there rather than the system evolve. This has been shown to be both untrue in a few systems (quiet impossible to explain all) and is logically flawed.

For example people have shown that designed systems like the mousetrap are reducible. This may not seem relevant but a mousetrap was one of the key demonstrations used in the initial explaining of irreducible complexity. This shows that because you can't perceive how a system is reducible does not mean it isn't.

Secondly it makes only one prediction "You shall find irreducible systems". Which doesn't mean anything as irreducibility can come from a multitude of things. My favorite example is that if a previous function changes into something else and all evidence linking to it are completely removed of previous function. For example if I take a glass table/cup/window and shatter it or melt it down, color it and make a lawn ornament out of it then it is impossible to see those previous functions (Table/cup/window) in the new ornament. Yet it is comprised of all three. Especially if you lived in a hypothetical world that for some reason never conceived of cups/windows/tables made of glass.

Thus since irreducibility is not a sign of a designer (it is only one possibility out of many) then the whole theory falls apart. A flawed theory should not be taught alongside one that is not in he same way we should not teach the idea of a geocentric solar system (Sun revolves around earth) alongside heliocentric one (Earth revolves around Sun). The theories are contradictory and one has been dis-proven. That is the existence of a Designer hasn't been dis-proven, but that this attempt to produce a scientific theory supporting their existence has been.

This leads me to my conclusion. No matter how true you believe it is or even how true it is you can't teach religion in a science classroom because it holds no bearing in science. Even if science supported ideas in a religious text you should not use religion in the classroom because that is only one out of many interpretations of the evidence and an unscientific one at that. Religion has already been decided to be separated from publicly run institutions (Separation of Church and state) by our government in the USA for good reason. Thus quit trying to say that the two "Theories" should be taught side by side. One is a extremely well supported scientific theory (a collection of many hypothesis that have all been tested and verified numerous times and all pointing towards the same or extremely similar conclusion) and the other is a dis-proven idea. That is not comparing apples to oranges. That is comparing apples to vinegar.

 

[Syzygy23]

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 "Social Darwinism" (which is an extremely annoying name as Darwin had nothing to do with "social darwinism"), 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.

Edit: Someone has kindly pointed out to me that it is instead "social darwinism" instead of just "darwinism". Also, to add a tad more context. Darwin specifically stated that evolution should not be applied to humans in that sense.

Edit: Sorry I have not answered all of your posts or comments. Hurricane Irene had other ideas so I just got power recently.

What the hell are you smoking? If anything, I have witnessed the OPPOSITE of this happening. Well, except the whole Social Darwinism part, people still get that wrong. But creationism being taught in the classroom? What? Huh? I haven't heard anything about that. I've been hearing about people getting in trouble and losing their jobs for teaching creationism in the classroom! Where have you heard otherwise?

 

[Lilani]

-snip-

You seem to think religious concepts being taught in schools is something new. On the contrary: the first modern educational establishments were created by religious groups--the Jesuites, mostly. At the time, the church was the only organization with the money, power, and generosity to offer such services to the general public (or at least those who could pay the tuition).

Now we have public education, which is on the whole much more secular. But private religious schools in the tradition of the Jesuite schools still exist, as you said. The difference being they now have certain secular standards to uphold in order to maintain accreditation and offer degrees that are worth anything. They probably do encourage their students to believe that creationism is "right," but they are required to teach the rest of the important stuff. At that point, it's up to the student to decide which they want to believe. And again, most schools like that are private anyway.

 

[joecool5000]

I've been a Christian all my life and so I've grown up detesting evolution.

But I just ask one thing. Someone send me a site or a video or something that has nice and solid evidence that proves it's true. Now I'm still going to believe in Creationism/Intelligent Design (there is actually a surprising amount of historical evidence that lines up God's creation timeline with the natural history timeline) but I just want to see where the scientists who are studying evolution are getting there beliefs from.

Who knows? I may even change my mind. (Even though that is highly unlikely.)

 

[oktalist]

You seem to think religious concepts being taught in schools is something new.

It is if they are taught in science class.

 

[oktalist]

I've been a Christian all my life and so I've grown up detesting evolution.

Why should that be? Even Pope John Paul II said evolution is probably true.

 

[alimarin]

I've been a Christian all my life and so I've grown up detesting evolution.

But I just ask one thing. Someone send me a site or a video or something that has nice and solid evidence that proves it's true. Now I'm still going to believe in Creationism/Intelligent Design (there is actually a surprising amount of historical evidence that lines up God's creation timeline with the natural history timeline) but I just want to see where the scientists who are studying evolution are getting there beliefs from.

Who knows? I may even change my mind. (Even though that is highly unlikely.)

Read fucking everything. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_biology]

[HEADING=1]All of it[/HEADING]​

[sub]Don't forget the citations :3[/sub]

I lol'ed

Another misunderstanding on evolution is that everyone thinks we only know how to date things using Carbon dating, which is only 1 of the dozens of ways we can analyze the age of the Earth.

The reason we have 4.6 billion years old as the age of the Earth, is because that is the estimated average of all of the methods of dating.

 

[Dasmaster]

I've been a Christian all my life and so I've grown up detesting evolution.

But I just ask one thing. Someone send me a site or a video or something that has nice and solid evidence that proves it's true. Now I'm still going to believe in Creationism/Intelligent Design (there is actually a surprising amount of historical evidence that lines up God's creation timeline with the natural history timeline) but I just want to see where the scientists who are studying evolution are getting there beliefs from.

Who knows? I may even change my mind. (Even though that is highly unlikely.)

I think you have misunderstood something. The "Evolutionary theory" you learn from videos and websites are not the "Evolutionary theory" scientists work with. It takes a long time to learn about such a broad theory since it touches on allot of subjects.

If you want to "test" it what you want to look for is "predictability" and such. As an example. Lets say we want to find a lizard that is thought to have lived 500 000 years ago. Can the scientists know where to dig and how deep by knowing about the previous and next species in that family?

Anyway the bottom line is understand that what you are likley to hear is only a simplified version of it.

 

[BrassButtons]

Everyone has the right to believe whatever they want

Not in science class they don't. Or more precisely: they can believe whatever they want, but not all beliefs will counted as a correct answer. Evolution is science. ID is not. Even if ID is correct it should not be taught in science classes. There are no scientific theories competing with Evolution, thus there is nothing other than Evolution that need be taught in science class.

But I just ask one thing. Someone send me a site or a video or something that has nice and solid evidence that proves it's true.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/index.shtml

Alternatively you can start with the biology section of your local library and go from there.

 

[Lilani]

You seem to think religious concepts being taught in schools is something new.

It is if they are taught in science class.

Ah, I see. Well I suppose THAT argument isn't worth maintaining if you're going to dodge my point entirely.

I've been a Christian all my life and so I've grown up detesting evolution.

Why should that be? Even Pope John Paul II said evolution is probably true.

What he said was evolution and Christianity are compatible, which I do agree with. They are not mutually exclusive, after all. Why is it assumed God could not use a system like evolution to create life? It would make perfect sense. Creation doesn't have to be like a David Copperfield trick, where something's not there one second and it's there the next.

In other words, the Pope didn't say God didn't make everything. That would make no sense. He said evolution could have been God's design.

 

[Amphoteric]

I've been a Christian all my life and so I've grown up detesting evolution.

But I just ask one thing. Someone send me a site or a video or something that has nice and solid evidence that proves it's true. Now I'm still going to believe in Creationism/Intelligent Design (there is actually a surprising amount of historical evidence that lines up God's creation timeline with the natural history timeline) but I just want to see where the scientists who are studying evolution are getting there beliefs from.

Who knows? I may even change my mind. (Even though that is highly unlikely.)

This is a really concise video that proves evolution. Just watch it.

The person that is explaining it is a Catholic.


By the way, that is just ONE of the many, many facts biologists have to prove evolution. We have our evolutionary history written all over us.

 

[joecool5000]

I've been a Christian all my life and so I've grown up detesting evolution.

Why should that be? Even Pope John Paul II said evolution is probably true.

Well, actually the basis of Darwin's evolution was to rebel against the idea that God created the world. That it all just randomly happened with nothing overseeing it. So most Christians reject the idea because of it. But obviously we can't prove anything. All we believe is that there definitely is a God. So we figure that God created the universe. So I suppose we aren't necessarily detesting the theory of evolution itself, but the reason for which it was thought of in the first place.

 

[BrassButtons]

Well, actually the basis of Darwin's evolution was to rebel against the idea that God created the world.

Source?

It is my understanding that the basis of Darwin's evolution was to study the natural world and see what he could learn from it, because that was his passion.

 

[trollnystan]

Well, actually the basis of Darwin's evolution was to rebel against the idea that God created the world. That it all just randomly happened with nothing overseeing it. So most Christians reject the idea because of it. But obviously we can't prove anything. All we believe is that there definitely is a God. So we figure that God created the universe. So I suppose we aren't necessarily detesting the theory of evolution itself, but the reason for which it was thought of in the first place.

What? I'm sorry, but I've read articles and books that deal with evolution, albeit in a layman way, and if they mention Darwin most of them describe his struggle with his faith in God and the way his theory pointed towards there being no god.

In the end, IIRC, he was against religions but was still a Theist. He in no way set out to disprove God's existence; in fact he was still a Creationist when he first set sail on the Beagle to begin his studies.

/5 cents (someone more knowledgeable than me is welcome to correct me)

EDIT: And with "layman way" I mean in a way that a layman can understand. Just thought I'd clarify =)

 

[evilneko]

Well, actually the basis of Darwin's evolution was to rebel against the idea that God created the world.

Yeah, gonna have to call bullshit on that line of Creationist propaganda.

Since you have already been provided with plenty of reading material, I figure I'll go ahead and link you to some video material. potholer54's channel [http://youtube.com/user/potholer54] contains possibly the easiest to understand science videos on youtube. cdk007 [http://youtube.com/user/cdk007] is more in-depth but might leave less scientifically-literate folk lost, though the Blind Watchmaker video should be fairly easy for anyone to understand.

 

[Flac00]

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 "Social Darwinism" (which is an extremely annoying name as Darwin had nothing to do with "social darwinism"), 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.

Edit: Someone has kindly pointed out to me that it is instead "social darwinism" instead of just "darwinism". Also, to add a tad more context. Darwin specifically stated that evolution should not be applied to humans in that sense.

Edit: Sorry I have not answered all of your posts or comments. Hurricane Irene had other ideas so I just got power recently.

What the hell are you smoking? If anything, I have witnessed the OPPOSITE of this happening. Well, except the whole Social Darwinism part, people still get that wrong. But creationism being taught in the classroom? What? Huh? I haven't heard anything about that. I've been hearing about people getting in trouble and losing their jobs for teaching creationism in the classroom! Where have you heard otherwise?

Yes actually, states including: Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Luisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, have all had major movements to get their schools to teach ID and Creationism. In fact, I do believe that Texas (I don't know about officially) commonly teaches ID and Creationism in science class. We don't have that problem in the North (due to a strong and well received scientific community), but south of the Mason-Dixon this is a problem.

 

[Flac00]

-snip-

You seem to think religious concepts being taught in schools is something new. On the contrary: the first modern educational establishments were created by religious groups--the Jesuites, mostly. At the time, the church was the only organization with the money, power, and generosity to offer such services to the general public (or at least those who could pay the tuition).

Now we have public education, which is on the whole much more secular. But private religious schools in the tradition of the Jesuite schools still exist, as you said. The difference being they now have certain secular standards to uphold in order to maintain accreditation and offer degrees that are worth anything. They probably do encourage their students to believe that creationism is "right," but they are required to teach the rest of the important stuff. At that point, it's up to the student to decide which they want to believe. And again, most schools like that are private anyway.

This is mostly a public school problem. Private schools have the issue that a portion of their corriculum is out of the control of the government, so these things do happen.
Also, I do know that this is not a new concept, however the reasons for the new wave of "anti-evolution" now is ridiculous and unneeded. The fact that we are still having the problems of over 100 years ago is not good.