How much background in science does one need to really understand evolution?

Question

I see many people here discussing evolution v. creation. Many of the people discussing it don't really seem to be scientists or have much science background (that's only an impression though).

It got me wondering if your average person can really understand the science of evolution. Anatomy, genetics, chaos theory- they are all fairly complex.

Any thoughts?

Answer 1

To *understand* the basic concepts of evolution and natural selection can be done with 7th-Grade science. It is actually one of the simplest theories in all of science. (I can explain evolution in three short paragraphs if you want ... just email me.)

The *evidence* for evolution takes a little more background ... probably high-school level Biology. But not much more. You need to understand a little bit about fossils, about anatomy, about genetics ... but not a whole lot.

Things like chaos theory only come into play when people try deliberately to complicate things by introducing the canard of Intelligent Design. When they introduce "science-ie" sounding terms like "irreducible complexity", a scientist who actually has some backing in complexity theory can see right away that it is completely bogus ... but to a kid in 7th or 10th grade it just gets confusing. Likewise when they mistate things like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, or use terms incorrectly such as "information", "microevolution", "point mutation", etc., a scientist sees right through these terms, but they sound persuasive to 10th graders.

But the part that really amazes me is how they misuse or misunderstand truly *basic* science terms like "theory", "law", "fact", or the difference between "evidence" and "proof." Forget about evolution. These people don't understand basic science.

If it was up to me ... I would stop kids from memorizing the Krebs Cycle, or the stages of mitosis ... and go through basic *science* terms ('theory', 'law', 'evidence', etc.) ... until it is *blatantly clear that when someone uses the phrase "just a theory", or "unproven theory", that they clearly have no understanding of science whatsoever.

So really, it is not so much that you need to know some basic biology ... but you need to have a really good foundation in the fundamentals of how *science* works, before you can get into this discussion.

Answer 2

Incredible, Tricia R (above), says that any person arguing evolution is mean, vindictive and proud. Do you actually HAVE any brain cells Tricia? If the world went round allowing people to have mass delusions instead of the truth, we would all be dead from some horrible disease that we would have fooled ourselves into believing did not exist or would not affect us. Remember in 1980 when the conservative/religious right told everyone that God was punishing homosexuals for their deviant behavior when they were dying of AIDS? They thought only gays could contract it. Well, how 'bout that, science told the truth of the matter and saved lives. Science continues to allow us to save lives. Any who is the guy who said that evolution is still a theory since no additional proof has been found. Wake up fella, proof of evolution is everywhere, NO ONE PUBLISHES IT ANYMORE BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED. That's how science works, someone comes up with a theory and if it stands up to scrutiny over the years, well, then it becomes accepted. This does not mean it can never be challenged again but there are some theories or ideas that are very strong. Evolution is one of them. If guys like that guy were the braniacs of this planet, we would all be hugging tight to the coastlines, never going out to sea for fear of falling off the side of the earth. Wow, people, grow some brains.

Answer 3

One doesn't need a background in science as much as one needs to understand the scientific method.

Science is about looking at facts and evidence and coming to conclusions about things that can be measured and counted and seen and are real in the natural world. Any experiments done must be capable of being replicated by other scientists. Or, as is often the case in evolution, to find other evidence that agrees with previous evidence (like DNA agreeing with fossil evidence).

Creation is about starting with a god did it and arguing everything from that premise. Some argue as young earth creationists and some as intelligent designers who say a god started it all with the big bang. Both start with the premise that a god exists with no proof other than that they can't see any other way things could have happened.

The other thing is, creationists and intelligent designer believers have vastly different beliefs. A god created everything 6000 years ago or a god started everything 15 billion years ago. There may be small disagreements or interpretation of evidence between evolutionary biologists, paleontologists and geologist, but none are anywhere near as far apart as 6000 years and 15 billion years.

I find it interesting that you question the expertise of the people on the science side but not those on the creation side.............

(Edit: Holy Smoke tells me I misinterpreted this and that the question was about creationists questioning evolution with little understanding of science. Apologies)

Answer 4

i'm 20, have a bachelor of science , but have not specifically studied evolutionary science in a university context, only a bit in high school. I am really interested in it though and i read a lot about evolution and the path that animals have taken to be what they are today. i understand evolution pretty well, but i don't have as much knowledge of genetics, but i still know a bit about it.

Answer 5

Well, in my opinion, the concepts are fairly simple to understand if they are explained properly; however, understanding the concept is far easier than understand the details of the inner working and functions of these things.

I think you can understand what they are and how they work, but to really understand and be capable of, say, teaching it to someone else requires more than just the basics.

I'd imagine there are those who would not be able to understand, no matter what they are taught - due either to religious influence that keeps them from letting the information in, or a low IQ.

Answer 6

Well I believe scientist and historians are some of the smartest people in the world. So I put my trust in them to show me the truth (or at least as much truth as we can know).

then I listen to/embrace their teachings and it helps me when they simplify their theories.

Answer 7

My personal opinion is that you don't need to be a scientist to understand what is the reality? We cannot all of us be scientists, we can choose to believe who is more convincing. Education will help you a lot to understand and perceive different concepts, but it is not a barrier to people who desire to know.

Answer 8

Evolution and natural selection are fairly simple, though broad concepts. Go here.

http://www.talkirorigins.org

Answer 9

well even the best scientists debate evolution facts among each other. There are many different perspectives of how evolution came about.

Now if you believe in evolution and want to debate with a religious person then you must really know your stuff ans so should they.

I think knowing and understanding the principle facts are enough but know and understand them very well and any argument that can be brought against them.

I personally understand why Christians want to convince unbelievers because they care for there souls in the after life.

But why are evolutionists so hateful that they want to stomp on the hopes of people who who have faith in something.

It is purely vindictive and out of pride and no good intentions are ever there.

So I personally question the character of any person trying to convince others of evolution. Its like a mean old person going and telling 5 year old children theres no Santa hes fake

Answer 10

You know....if I didn't know better, I'd think you just called me a monkey!! lol!!