How can anyone in the 21st Century still believe, that the theory of Evolution is incorrect. ?

Answer 1

Well, its not a 'theory' any longer; its the lynch-pin of modern biology. It is regarded as scientific 'law' because it ties everything together very nicely, much like atomic theory does for chemistry.

But any respectable scientist will say that it is 'possible' that the idea of evolution of life be completely discounted by scientists some day, however extremely unlikely. It would be like chemists throwing away the Periodic Table of Elements. Not likely at all, but possible.

Thats why scientists seldom use the word 'fact.' All things in science are open to criticism. You get a good idea, one that really holds water like evolution or atomic theory, and you stop calling it 'theory' because its far beyond conjecture. It works but its not infallable, so it becomes a Law of science. Scientific Laws can and do change, but not often.

This is very important to realize because if people started 'believing' that evolution was 'correct' or 'a fact,' then science would die. It would become like religion with people 'believing' in it and keeping it from advancing. New discoveries would be shunned like heresies to the religious... really, its a slippery slope.

But as for people who refuse to acknowledge even the most remote possibility that evolution has taken place, those people are simply closed to the idea because of what their parents and peers have told them their whole lives. Its nothing new and its completely irrelevant that its the 21st century. People will still shun contrary ideas well into the 30th century and beyond

Answer 2

Some people believe it is incorrect because it is just what you labeled it in your question.. a theory. Many theories of evoluton have still yet to been proven. No matter how many fossils we dig up, or how much we know about other planets, or how much (inaccurate) carbon-dating is done, we will probably never be able to prove exactly how life on Earth began. There are too many holes in the evolution theory to be perfectly correct, in my opinion.

Personally, I believe in Evolution through Creationism. I find it really hard to believe that certain animals, and especially humans, were just some sort of random mutation of nature. I think that the different seeds for life were placed here for a reason by a higher creator, God. And that evolution was just something that happened after, either because God allowed it to occur or perhaps it was exactly what He intented to happen.

Answer 3

1) Indoctrination by a small and not academically qualified, but vocal and well-funded, group of fundamentalist science-bashers. Misconceptions like "their is scientific evidence against evolution" (plain wrong), "transitional forms have never been found" (plain wrong) and "evolution is incompatible with the bible" (at least debatable) can only be explained by indoctrination.

2) Lack of science education. Most of the anti-evolutionary rhetoric questions that you see on this site (like "why are there still monkeys") show an extreme lack of basic knowledge about biology. Please put some biology in the American primary school curriculum.

3) Theologists and church leaders fail to speak up against the science-bashhers. Maybe they think it's not their job (they are not scientists), maybe they are afraid of loosing audience and sponsors if they speak up in debates that are considered controversial by some.

4) Evolution is contra-intuitive to some because of the incomprehensible long time scale on which it works. This is directly exploited by science-bashers by making the distinction between "micro"- and "macro-evolution".

5) Science does not give an answer to moral and estethic questions. Ask a scientist why the natural World is so beautiful or whether we are supposed to eat pigmeat, and he will say that it's not his field. And then people get disappointed and turn science the back.

Answer 4

I would like to point out to those claiming that Evolution is "just a theory" that gravity is "just a theory" too (the "law" of gravity is a misnomer). You gonna jump from a cliff to come to the conclusion that while it cannot be PROVEN, it is reasonable to accept at this time? It would, I concede, be the most scientific thing to do...

The scientific method, and thus the term "theory" is intended to be used to disprove...in essence, NOTHING can be fully proven, only demonstrated to a point where something is generally accepted. It is in disproving a theory that the scientific method draws its merit. Evolution cannot be disproven. And there is evidence to support it. Fossils. Genetics. Just like there is evidence to support "Intelligent design". Stories. Books.

Just remember that Galileo was killed by the Church for saying the earth revolved around the sun and other such maniacal things...we should all take a moment to praise the church and it's forward thinking ways for pardoning him...in the last decade. If it took that long to come around for the whole Earth/Sun thing, whaddya expect?

Answer 5

Even though I'm embarrassed to admit that up until about 6 years ago, I was an Evolutionist, my question to you at this point, is "How can anyone in the 21st Century still believe, if they've seriously looked at the evidence and arguments on both sides with an open mind, that the theory of Evolution is correct?" If Charles Darwin were alive now and looked at the lack of evidence that supports his theory, he would probably have serious doubts about it, and, thinking man that he was, would probably retract many of his assertions. For instance, he admitted at the time of writing "Origin of the Species" in 1859, that at that point there were no "transitional" fossils that helped establish that species really changed from one to another. He assumed as we looked further we would find many. Now, 150 years later, we have still found almost none. We can all agree that organisms change to adapt to their environment (microevolution), but the crux of evolution -- macroevolution -- has not been established. Once in awhile, they find something that could be argued to be transitional, but they almost always turn out to be inadequate. They have certainly not found the thousands that Darwin expected.

Furthermore, evolution still cannot even explain how many of the necessary transitions could even happen in a stepwise fashion, as Darwin's theory requires. No one can explain, for instance, how a reptile could change heart structure and function, lung form and function, grow feathers, and gain the ability to fly, in order to turn into a bird as they posit (some now claim the evolution went the other direction; the same questions need to be asked). And why do we not find any of these in-between, or transitional, species, such as a bird with a reptilian heart or lung, or a reptile with feathers (the Archaeopteryx that is often cited as an example of this can be shown to be almost entirely bird, though it does have some reptilian characteristics)? They just say, "Well, it took billions of years, and anything can happen in billions of years." Unfortunately, Darwin's theory suggests that it's not likely to. Each in-between step above would make for an awkward, and therefore disadvantageous creature, so the necessary in-between steps are not likely to happen.

Likewise for the development of the circulatory system in mammals, eyes, the blood clotting system, or the development of bacterial flagella. No Evolutionist can explain, in a water-tight manner, the development of very many cellular or multicellular function through stepwise, continuously advantageous changes, much less changes to different species.

I could go on. But despite all these limitations, the theory of evolution is held to tenaciously by many with as much fervor as any religious zealot, apparently mostly because "the scientists" say it's true. It almost seems to be more of a belief system than a scientific theory. And it takes more faith to believe in than Creation, which is why I finally changed my mind about it, after having been an Evolutionist for about 35 years.

Even if the above could be established, Evolution has a huge "Achilles Heel" -- it does not even address the biggest question of all about life -- that is, how did life begin in the first place? Neither Darwin, nor any other Evolutionist since him has seriously attempted to answer that question -- 'cuz they can't.

Answer 6

I think many people are not totally convinced by the theory of Evolution. They're not mad or stupid.

Here are the reasons why the theory of Evolution need not be accepted as truth.
1. Its only a theory. Last I checked, it quite difficult to 'prove' a theory beyond a doubt - irrefutable evidence is quite hard to come by.
2. To really know if we are what we are because of Evolution, we'd in effect have to go back in time and observe 'evolution' over millions of years.

Answer 7

As illustrated by hundreds of years of arguement, there is no logical way for life to start. We can see quite clearly that survival of the fittest is a reliable theory now, but that still requires there be a "fittest" to start with. The gaps in science's theory of the beginning of life and the apparent incredibility of intelligent creation means that nothing can be proved, and each person will, in the end, choose for themselves what they believe.

Answer 8

Beats me. Evolution is a settled question, as far as science is concerned.

Answer 9

Religion is a bastard....Look what the Catholic church did in the dark ages (or should i say, look how they caused the dark ages and over 100 years of scientific regression)

Answer 10

Maybe they r mad! Everyone noe we go through evolution 2 b-come human!!