Ask a Question
or
Create a Poll
  1. Home /
  2. Questions /
  3. Science
  4. / Biology
  5. / Human Evolution
  6. / Evolutionary Theory

by JP1967 on December 29th, 2003

JP1967

Question

Help answer this question below.

What are the arguments against the Theory of Evolution?

  • Like
  • Report
Share:
Other

Answers. Showing one answer.

  • by lynnenorth on October 12th, 2005

    lynnenorth

    There are no real arguments against evolution in the field of science. All the arguments I have seen are based on misunderstandings of or deliberate misstatements of what is known by science, rely on the listener's ignorance of the real details of science, and are generally restatements of the same arguments as have been used since the time of William Paley (1743-1805; biography here: http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/paley.html). The site www.talkorigins.org reviews all the common arguments, such as a supposed lack of transitional fossils or the supposed improbability of certain chains of events, or the fallacious claim that mutations never "add information" to the genome, as well as why these arguments don't work.

    The processes and products of evolution can also be nonintuitive and difficult to grasp, as opposed to the appealing simplicity of "God did it." The problem with that is that using ease of comprehension as a measure of truth does not always work. As an analogy, think what your initial reaction would be the first time someone told you that a caterpillar and a butterfly were the same creature, assuming you had never seen a cocoon and didn't know about the process of transformation.

    But what all these arguments all ultimately boil down to is, the idea of evolution offends people, and bothers them at a very emotional level. In some views, evolution makes us "not special", and people have a hard time reconciling that to our natural view of ourselves as the center of things and as the "children of God." People also seem to hold the misconception that you *must* give up any belief in God in order to accept evolution. This is absurd, and there are many, many Christians in science and in biology in particular; the only thing one needs to give up is a belief in the literal interpretation of a supposedly inerrant Scripture. That is, to some, taken as the ultimate argument against evolution.

    EDIT:
    For those who claim that "many" scientists do not "believe in evolution" based on scientific evidence, it is obvious they have no real familiarity with the practising fields of the life sciences. Creationist sites claiming "hundreds" of dissenters may actually have one or two dozen legitimate names; against that I will happily stack the roughly 20,000 life scientists registered with the AAAS and the 140,000 life scientists elsewhere, and I would like to draw people's attention to Project Steve, a graphic illustration of just how silly the creationist "lists of dissenting scientists" are:
    http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3541_project_steve_2_16_2003.asp
    (quote: "Creationists draw up these lists to convince the public that evolution is somehow being rejected by scientists, that it is a "theory in crisis." Most members of the public lack sufficient contact with the scientific community to know that this claim is totally unfounded. NCSE has been exhorted by its members to compile a list of thousands of scientists affirming the validity of the theory of evolution, but although we easily could have done so, we have resisted such pressure. We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!")

    I will repeat: there are no arguments against evolution in the fields of science, although those who object to the idea of evolution on religious or emotional grounds try to make it look as if there were in order to lend themselves an appearance of "scientific legitimacy". It is not honest, and examination of the evidence itself, rather than what they describe the evidence as being, speaks quite clearly.

    News and views from the AAAS:
    http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/evolution/

    Resources from the National Academies of Science:
    http://nationalacademies.org/evolution/

    Policy statement from the American Geophysical Union:
    http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/positions/evolution.shtml
    and an introduction to who they are:
    http://www.agu.org/inside/abt_agu.html

    I also suggest that a trip to any university library, or a sufficiently large hospital library, and a quick leaf through every life sciences journal to be found, would make science's position clear.

    I encourage people to actually look at what is happening in science for themselves -- learn what the science actually is, so that evaluation of evidence can be done from a position of knowledge rather than ignorance.

    Comments

    • You are either hiding something or unfamiliar with the arguments against evolution.

      Master Asker

      by Master Asker on October 12th, 2005

    • The question asked for arguments against, not dismissal of or insults toward those who don't find evolution persuasive.

      Thom64

      by Thom64 on October 12th, 2005

    • what it boils down to is the concept of God offends people; and they must find a round about explanation for the obvious

      breadmanpaul

      by breadmanpaul on October 12th, 2005

    • And if I list 50,000 religious experts and studies which conclude there is a God, you will accept my claims?

      Anonymous

      by Anonymous on December 19th, 2005

    • So anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant? Very convincing, where can I sign up to your cult.

      Anonymous

      by Anonymous on November 4th, 2005

    • In matters of science, the NUMBER of "experts" is irrelevant. A theory must stand on its own merit based on sound reasoning..

      HungryGuy

      by HungryGuy on December 29th, 2005

    • Some cannot believe the human race may have arisen by chance. A lesson from the Burgess Shale.

      RedJohn

      by RedJohn on January 17th, 2006

    • It would be more useful to list some of the arguments themselves before going on to discredit them.

      Anonymous

      by Anonymous on January 19th, 2006

    • A biometricist? Oh dear. To be a good scientist you have to be a sceptic. One theory is better than another. All are real.

      Quirkie

      by Quirkie on March 2nd, 2006

    • This is incorrect. There are plenty of scientifcally-based & biblically-based arguments against evolution.

      Answers101

      by Answers101 on March 14th, 2006

    • Answers101, give us an example of scientific peer review published research papers that challenge evolution. There are none. What you will find are pseudoscientific writings from non-scientific sources, such as the infamous Discovery Institute. If these people really have any valid challenges to evolution, why don't they publish research and do the heavy lifting that any good scientist is expected to do. Creationists avoid doing all that work, and instead try to circumvent the democratic process of peer review in favor of lobbying politicians and state education beards to get their non-vetted ideas taught as alternatives to vetted and established science.

      Gratis

      by Gratis on June 25th, 2010

    • Like
    • Report

    11 comments | Post one | Permalink

Want to attach an image to your answer? Click here.

Did this answer your question? If not, then ask a new question or create a poll.

More Questions. Additional questions in this category.

You're reading What are the arguments against the Theory of Evolution?

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Ads

Related Questions

Professionally Researched

Answerbag

a Demand Media company