The misinterpretation of evolution

[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.

 

[Dimitriov]

Everything I know about evolution I learned from this game:

This is how mammals superseded the reptiles!

Educational stuff

 

[Dann661]

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.

 

[Fbuh]

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 reasone why Creationism nor evolution can be taught simulataneously.

 

[Lord Quirk]

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.

 

[lacktheknack]

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.

Bloody ninjas!

Anyways, OF COURSE there's misinterpretations everywhere. It's a controversial subject! And as much as 98% of this forum wants to believe that it's proven fact and we can all just move on, it's still a controversial subject.

 

[matoasters]

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 reasone why Creationism nor evolution can be taught simulataneously.

Creationism has absolutely no basis in fact, and should not be taught as such. It is the view of a religion, and thus should not be taught to kids as a scientific theory, but as a part of a religious history class, should they choose to take one.

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

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 :/).

 

[JamesWebber]

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 reasone why Creationism nor evolution can be taught simulataneously.

if think this list and and its top item explain it well enough

 

[thenumberthirteen]

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.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

Well, in my time (as in right fucking now and the past 10 years), evolution was such an obvious truth to me and everyone around me (including even the religious people) that it's credibility was never brought up. Not that I remember, anyway.
The basics of the theory (by now, it's probably safe to say that it is not a mere "theory", as it has been proven so thoroughly that it'd require something truly earth-shattering to change it's status) were taught in school, noone ever questioned them. Those who are interested in such things look into it further.

In short, the whole business of questioning how evolution works (or if it is an incorrect theory) is something... alien to me. Cultures are different, I guess.

 

[Mathak]

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 reasone why Creationism nor evolution can be taught simulataneously.

The class in which evolution is taught is known as Science. Creationism is not science, and neither is ID. Therefore evolution and creationism should not be taught simultaneously. Creationism and ID can be taught in the religion class, though.

 

[BrassButtons]

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.

 

[Cpu46]

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.

Just a nitpick: It is the Hypothesis of Intelligent design. It is not yet accepted as a theory and honestly probably never will be, its just that it is impossible to test it using the scientific method.

I agree that people should not be forced to believe in evolution, however I believe that it should still be in the classroom like most theories are and I do not believe that the hypothesis of Intelligent design should be taught as a counter to Evolution because we have no successfully tested or peer reviewed alternative to Evolution.

Just because a majority of the world believes in it does not mean it gets to circumvent the entire scientific method and go straight to theory.[footnote]venting some frustration I have on this general topic. Vitriol not aimed at anyone in particular[/footnote]

 

[BrassButtons]

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.

 

[King Toasty]

From the Book of Forums, Science 3:48;

"Lo, men and women of forums shall never know what Evolution is, nor what causes it, for they do not wish to know. Those that do wish to understand may understand ONLY through ancient right of Biology classes and intense study; for the young who claim to understand Evolution cannot truly understand it."

TL;DR: Study it.

 

[Dinwatr]

Intelligent Design fails in one fundamental way: it fails to propose a mechanism. I've argued with ID advocates quite a bit over this, but the simple fact remains that "something" is not a mechanism. It's an excuse.

Further, ID fails to follow the scientific method. The proponents look at a handful of traits, without looking at the data found for those traits (seriously, Darwin disproved the irreducible complexity of the eye and it's still occasionally trotted out as ID's big win), and say in essence "Look at how complex this is! It has to have been designed!" This isn't science, it's sensationalism.

As for the misinterpretation of evolution by most people, the error isn't really in the facts, it's in the assumption that evolution is simple. Most Creationists/ID advocates seem to think that a few hours or days spent looking through a few well-known books is sufficient to grant one expert status. In truth, I've been studying the subject for 10 years and I'm still finding out how little I know about it. The CONCEPT is simple enough--nonrandom survival of random variations through time. The APPLICATION, however, is literally more complex than the whole of the biosphere's history (as the biosphere offers only a single example of one possible set of evolutionary pathways). The key is for people who don't understand evolution to realize that it's just as complicated as any other field of science, and to either learn the field (and not just the big names, either) or admit that they don't care to. If they don't care to learn it, they shouldn't present their opinions as anything but opinions,and we should dismiss them as irrelevant. It's not a matter of expertise, but of knowledge--these people simply don't know enough to know about evolution.

 

[MegaManOfNumbers]

Simply put:

Individuals do not evolve, the group does.
Without others to be your stepping stones you never be on top.

 

[kjrubberducky]

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.

 

[Ulquiorra4sama]

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.