Why do Americans not understand Evolution?

Social Darwinism is real, but its more of an ideology than a natural occurrence. And its a toxic one at that. In practice it inevitably leads to oppression and stagnation (as those at the top develop systems to keep themselves where they are and society where it is instead of working towards a better future). Which is the opposite of what real evolution is about.

 

When has the theory of evolution been described as a law - Stop trying to build a smoke screen with wet hay

 

You've created a strawman. You cant EVER observe evolution happen because we are on the micro level, evolution occurs on the macro level.
Most people are born with wisdom teeth however many if not most need them removed because we have evolved to no longer need them to crush bones and our jaws literally are no longer large enough to house them. They grow back into our jawbones. Our brains evolved enough to allow us to catch food and cook over fire thus negating the need for our appendix to digest raw meat. Many humans actually need their appendix removed or it will kill them. (like me). Why our own brains will slow down or alter the evolution process because we are smart enough to remove my appendix. In nature, I would have died at the age of 17 without the aid of other smart humans. As a result I can pass on my bad appendix gene thus slowing the evolution process when it comes to the appendix. If we all died from a ruptured appendix then the appendix would fizzle out much faster.
Humans have different color skin because we evolved in different areas of the earth that had differing amounts of sunlight. Darker skin to protect against more light , lighter skin to allow for less light. (See vitamin d)
Some people are born without wisdom teeth. If they live long and are healthier that gene will get passed on. For example a small % of people die getting their wisdom teeth extracted, the people who don't have them don't run the risk. As you can see that % is microscopic and would take thousands of years to play out before you would notice even slight changes.
You can never see evolution you can only observe its outcome.

 

Wrong. Humans are social animals. In building civilization, we simply traded the literal jungle for the social jungle. But the rules are all still the same. You either learn to survive or you get left behind. And the people that get offended by those natural rules and try to micromanage society with an overbearing hand in an attempt to hold everyone up equally only end up stifling progress for the entire species. I know it's hard to accept, but if you truly believe in evolution, then you should have made peace with this a long time ago. It's not in the species' best interest for everyone to thrive. The strongest progress and the weakest get weeded out. You can't take it personally. It's because of this process that you weren't born with a myriad of unnecessary genetic flaws. If nature were socialist, we'd all be sickly and defective.

 

Better go back to school and fill this gap in your education. Why God created specific parasites for each species and parasites of chimps are most related to ours? Why we have almost the same pubic lice similar to lice of chimps? How about geologic time records and fossils? Why there is a certain consistence in paleontological records? Why geographic biodiversity is in agreement with pattern of plate tectonics? It is a lot of fun to study evolution. Even kids understand it.

 

I can believe in evolution. I just don't believe one strain landed on this planet and evolved into all livings things we have today.

 

To those, who are promoting "intelligent design": better go back to school and fill this gap in your education. Why God created specific parasites for each species and parasites of chimps are most related to ours? Why we have almost the same pubic lice similar to lice of chimps? How about geologic time records and fossils? Why there is a certain consistence in paleontological records? Why geographic biodiversity is in agreement with pattern of plate tectonics? It is a lot of fun to study evolution. Even kids understand it.

 

The definition of evolution is quite clear: change in allele frequency in a population over time. And this is observed all of the time. But creationists like to separate it into the microevolution/adaptation, which is easily observed, and macroevolution/speciation (now genus-changing, I guess), which is not as easily observed. The theory of evolution is the explanation for why allele frequencies change over time. Mutation and selection are the current components of the theory. As with adaptation, these are easily observed. What seems to trip people up is the conclusions that are drawn from the theory and supported by the evidence that we see in nature: all organisms are related and come from a single distant ancestor.

No one is arguing for evolution to be a law. That would be silly. Scientific theories don't graduate to laws. Theory is as high up as any well-supported idea can be elevated.

 

Do you think there is a need for eyewitness evidence to be able to prove something?

Also the term "theory" simply means "explanation", no need for it to be a "law" for it to be accepted by the scientific community. After all the theory is used every day in scientific inquiry. The day it stops being useful is the day when it will be ditched, that's why it's not necessary for it to be a "law".

 

I hope science comes up with a cure for wilful ignorance.

 

you mean that no one would be skeptical of it if they understood it?

 

Thats not strictly true

The Italian Walls Lizard experiment is rather famous among those who make a living from such studies

http://www.pnas.org/content/105/12/4792.long

And one humans seem to have triggered by our need to pollute

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution

 

What I find interesting is that many americans and europeans who subscribe to evolution and the big bang theory are willing to have faith in events that took place billions of years ago (events which they did not witness), but these same people many times refuse to believe that jews largely remained middle eastern simply because they lived in europe for 1,000 years. 1,000 years is a spec of dust compared to the time lapses evolution allows us to imagine. Yet so many have faith that certain events happened millions and billions of years ago. I'm not saying I don't believe in evolution myself, but I have always thought most westerners simply subscribe to it because its the popular thing to do..Also these same people have no problems believing that african americans are largely african even though they lived in the Americas for 500 years. Does anyone see my point?

 

Your wrong. What makes us human is that we have the capability to choose our own path as a species, to reforge our environment. Whether it be societal, or the geographic world.

The end result of Social Darwinism for all intents and purposes, is feudalism. And if you know anything about history, you know man kind didn't start making leaps and bounds in science and technology until we began moving out of that phase. When the government's began to take more care of the weak and lower class, when the state and the rich began to patron the arts and sciences, when financial gain through complex and globalised trade became more attractive than simply sacking your neighbors cities.

Humanity is always progressing, and must always do so. For to step back means our stagnation, and eventually our doom. This world grows small, the resources harder to get. Under social Darwinism we would sit on this single rock until our species burns out like a candle. The rich wouldn't be willing to spend the hundreds of billions it will take to expand outwards until it is to late. They would spend centuries beating down the poor and warring over table scraps just as they did a thousand years ago. Progressive government by the people and for the people is the only way to curb that.

 

Evolution is fact.. the theory is how life evolved over time

gravity is fact.. the theory is how gravity works

.

 

You've pointed out a common flaw in the anti-evolution argument. Where-in creationists and ID'ers argue that evolution cannot be re-created or observed in the laboratory therefore it must be false. When contrary evidence is shown, as in the yeast example, they reject the very premise of their own argument with "well humans manipulated it."

Evolutionary selection pressure is just that, whether it is by nature or by human intervention. The organisms and mechanisms involved are oblivious to the source of that impetus, whether it be nutrients delivered by pipette or by naturally occurring means.

 

Does this mean that there is no national standard curriculum? If not then how are grades standardised?

- - - Updated - - -

You do understand that in scientific terminology 'theory' does not mean 'guess'?

 

Lol...I would say you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.
Evolution is at work in nature as we speak, and it has been repeatedly observed and evident to anyone who isn't a religious nutter.

 

Christian interest groups and lobbyists... but you knew that already.

 

Let's believe in a deity we've never seen. As for evolution, we can't see it happening because it's so slow, so we shouldn't believe it.

 

If evolution has never been observed why do you have to get a flu shot every year?

Evolution is a fact.

 

I think he was looking for something to watch evolution occur before his eyes like a light switch. Like a third arm all of a sudden growing. It doesn't happen that way.
Although the 36 years in the article is still to me before my eyes. That's amazing. I don't even see how it can be argued. This is where the conversation leads to humans don't evolve only animals do argument.

 

I would highly recommend the book "Song Of the Dodo" by David Quammen. An extremely accessible book on a many levels. He approaches the question of evolution not from the point of a done deal, but how did people like Wallace and Darwin get to it. He then goes on to apply the theory to examples in the modern world.

When you read the book you also come to the understanding that many who argue for it in public forums don't have a strong grasp on the topic either. Not entirely a bad thing - there are theories out there I have no clue about the science, but I am happy to accept them. But it does create an atmosphere that allows people like creationists a lot of wriggle room to work in.

 

Evolution doesnt need to be observed directly because genetic and comparative studies and fossil record is enough to establish that it happened without any doubt. In the same way that complete orbit of Neptune was never observed yet you are an idiot if you doubt it orbits the Sun. And this applies to science in general, indirect evidence is evidence just like direct observation.

Anyway, smaller scale evolution giving rise to new species was observed directly and large scale evolution giving rise to entirely new groups of life will be observed if humanity exists long enough.

 

The word "theory" in science doesnt imply any doubt about its validity. Scientific theories do no graduate into facts. Theory is used to refer to something uncertain only in common usage, not in science. In science, the correct word for something uncertain is hypothesis, altough nobody cares much about such questions of semantics anyway.

Theory of relativity and germ theory of disease are theories even tough proven beyond any doubt.