The level of public acceptance of evolution in the United States is now solidly above the halfway mark, according to a new study based on a series of national public opinion surveys conducted over the last 35 years.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/08/210820111042.htm


The level of public acceptance of evolution in the United States is now solidly above the halfway mark, according to a new study based on a series of national public opinion surveys conducted over the last 35 years.

"From 1985 to 2010, there was a statistical dead heat between acceptance and rejection of evolution," said lead researcher Jon D. Miller of the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan. "But acceptance then surged, becoming the majority position in 2016."

Examining data over 35 years, the study consistently identified aspects of education -- civic science literacy, taking college courses in science and having a college degree -- as the strongest factors leading to the acceptance of evolution.

"Almost twice as many Americans held a college degree in 2018 as in 1988," said co-author Mark Ackerman, a researcher at Michigan Engineering, the U-M School of Information and Michigan Medicine. "It's hard to earn a college degree without acquiring at least a little respect for the success of science."

I don't accept evolution said the corona virus.

Evolution doesn't care
What you think
or what you wear.

Mother Nature marches on
she works so hard
from dusk til dawn
You don't believe?
She'll only yawn.

She made your skin
She made your face
She made your hair
But stopped at grace

We've soiled her dress
We've smudged her cheeks
She is not pleased
And thinks were freaks.

Micro evolution is easy to accept its the big leaps that prove difficult c ult, there's just not much evidence for the kind of magic these people want us to believe, in the fossil layers suddenly in the Cambrian period we have complex trilobites, they appeared out of no where.

It's only difficult for people who are scientifically illiterate.

You don’t even realize you are parroting Bruce McConkie, do you?

"Micro evolution is easy to accept its the big leaps that prove difficult, there's just not much evidence for the kind of magic these people want us to believe, in the fossil layers suddenly in the Cambrian period we have complex trilobites, they appeared out of no where."

COMMENT: Microevolution, i.e. evolution occurring within populations of species, is supported by the genetic mutation, genetic variation, and natural selection story of the Modern Synthesis (MS), where genes are argued to be the exclusive units of selection. The Modern Synthesis insists that all Darwinian evolution is microevolution in this sense; and that any so-called "Macroevolution" i.e. Darwinian evolution between species or at higher levels of selection is a myth; such that ultimately all evolutionary change can ultimately be explained in terms of microevolution and gradualism. This contrasts with critics of the MS who insist that there are units of selection; and selection effects that are at higher than at genes; including, for example, the controversial idea of group selection.

So, to your statement, the "big leaps" apparent in the paleontological record are indeed controversial with respect to their appropriate explanation: Stephen J. Gould is famous for his notion of "punctuated equilibrium," which concept is anathema to the Modern Synthesis (See Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, chapter 9) which insists on gradualism.

Notwithstanding this controversy, both Gould and Dawkins agree that whatever the explanation is for any such paleontological leaps in the fossil record, there *is* at bottom an evolutionary explanation; and it is not "magic"! There is no debate within evolutionary biology about that! And, frankly, there is no genuine theological point to be made here!

Finally, I will end with a quote from Gould's book, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory:

"Nature's hierarchy is not fractal; each level . . . does some things well, and other things poorly or not at all--and the evolutionary pattern of nature features many essential things. . . . Gene selection is "good" at iterating elements--an important input of raw material for generating "organized adaptive complexity" at a higher level. Organisms are good at building complex adaptations. Species are good at forging temporal trends of geological duration, and their efforts largely regulate the relative diversity among phyla. . . To say (as Dawkins, Williams, and other detractors often do) that species selection must be unimportant because such a process can't build organismal complexity reminds me of the cook who didn't like opera because singing couldn't boil water." (Page 700)

By the way, if anyone does not understand what I just said, they should read Gould's well-reasoned and fair-minded book; all 1400 pages. (and avoid Dawkins' not so well-reasoned, and not-so-fair-minded books). Then come back and express an informed and reasoned opinion about evolutionary biology that is not just a rhetorical parroting of some dime-store popular book--whatever its motivation might be.

Gould is a far clearer thinker than Dawkins.

Maca not logged in Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Micro evolution is easy to accept its the big
> leaps that prove difficult c ult, there's just not
> much evidence for the kind of magic these people
> want us to believe, in the fossil layers suddenly
> in the Cambrian period we have complex trilobites,
> they appeared out of no where.

Anybody who does not accept evolution as the best theory of the origin of life on Earth, needs to be denied medical treatment for impacted wisdom teeth or appendicitis, both of which are vestiges left over from a time when humans subsisted on a diet of raw foods. Ever since we started cooking food, our jaws have shrunk and our brains got bigger, (hence the name, ‘Wisdom teeth’) and we outgrew the need for a functioning appendix, but it still remains.

No ‘intelligent designer’ would design the human body with worthless Wisdom Teeth and a needless appendix that can get infected and blow up and cause peritonitis that can kill you.

Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Plenty of time for evolution to work its "magic." Also, the fossil record is "incomplete" because earth is always changing (erosion, deep burial of rocks etc.) and it takes certain conditions to preserve bones, soft parts and even hard parts (shells). Only a small part of the life forms are preserved and only a small part of the preserved fossils are currently exposed where we can see them. Considering these facts, its actually great that we have as many fossils as we do.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2021 05:56PM by squirrely.

Well I guess I will just go along with my Annunaki theory and leave the rest of you to argue yours