[tcuoohjohn]

They are...Creation is faith...and Evolution is Science.

Granted evolution is just a theory. Much like the theory of gravity or electromagnetism. However I don't see folks jumping off high buildings to dispute gravity or sticking a fork in a socket to challenge electromagnetism.

Why is evolution so easily assailed?..because of scientific reason?...no. Because there are no dire consequences for challeging evolution.

[adam_az]

great post

[reg45]

Why is evolution so easily assailed?..because of scientific reason?...no. Because there are no dire consequences for challeging evolution. And because it is a slow process. Evolutionary changes within a single human lifetime can hardly be noticed.

[CobaltBlue]

CB's theory on why evolution is rejected in the Bible Belt(worth what you paid for it - no charge).

Darwin started writing in the 19th century, when the United States was still struggling with slavery and its aftermath. The "Descent of Man" was published in 1871.

At that time, it was widely perceived in the South that blacks looked, acted, and smelled like apes. Dehumanizing black people was convenient for their consciences, because nice people wouldn't treat other human beings the way they treated black people, and they knew it.

Along came Darwin, who pointed out that mankind's closest relatives are apes, which is indisputable, but also that we are directly related to apes, which was intolerable to Southerners who hated blacks.

This is what really scalds and burns them. How can they hate the detestable ape-like blacks when they are so closely related to them?

Jesus Christ, of course, was blonde and blue-eyed, which only enhances his adorable nature. If you don't believe me, take a look at Southern Baptist portrayals of Him.

Blacks are like apes. Apes are Bad. Blonds are Good. Thus, being related to apes is intolerable.

I'll bet you a dollar to a donut that if you scratch a creationist, this is what you'll find hidden in the deepest recesses of his or her mind.

[CobaltBlue]

Oh, theory #2, which I don't really think is as true as theory #1. Amazingly literal-mindedness. Some people are just that way.

There are a lot of otherwise reasonable people who have idees fixes, and you can't throw them off with dynamite. They've got their teeth and jaws into it like a pit bull and they won't ever give it up.

This is why you have otherwise intelligent men (it's almost always men, isn't it?) spending their entire lives trying to prove that they've found Noah's ark, or that the parting of the Red Sea really happened just as it was described in the Bible.

They start with the conclusion and then search for facts to prove it, dismissing those which don't fit the theory.

Which is exactly the opposite of the scientific method, as you know.

[metacognative]

If evolution is a science, please give me one empirical example of a beneficial mutation. If this mysterious miraculous power can turn a tree shrew into a human through pure chance, why are darwinites so defensive about proving it..not just proclaiming it.

[Leatherneck_MT]

It's so easily assailed because it has no definitive proof. Thus still a theory.

You can see Gravity work, you can see electricity work.

There is no proof whatsoever that Evolution is anything more than a theory concocted by Darwin.

Nice theory, but still.. just a theory with no basis in fact.

[StopGlobalWhining]

Are the theoretical and observed laws of electromagnetism just a theory? Or are they pretty much established fact?

Can you cite any questions about electromagnetism that call into question Maxwell's Equations, or the integration of the weak force for example?

Other than issues related to uniting all fundamental forces, including gravity, into a single Grand Unified Theory (GUT), it seems to me that electromagnetism is not in the category of a theory.

[RightWingAtheist]

Because there are no dire consequences for challenging evolution.

Actually, there are very dire consequences to challenging evolution. Environmental policy is dependent upon a knowledge of the processes of natural selection: how different ecosystems evolved, and how different organisms are adapted to specific conditions. Without it, there is no way of setting rational conservation standards. Modern medicine, particularly epidemiology, is increasingly dependent upon a knowledge of evolution. Why have antibiotic-resisitant germs suddenly appeared? Because those specific strains which were more resilient to the effects of powerful modern antibiotics were the ones which survived, and passed their resilient traits to successive generations. Knowledge of natural selection is absolutely crucial in determining how to treat potentially deadly future plagues.

But most importantly of all, when evolution is trashed on these shores, it makes Americans the laughing stock of the rest of the world. And when people who claim to be "conservatives" are the ones doing the trashing, it further damages the image of conservatism in the eyes of the "educated". If America is to prove itself worth of the Enlightenment values on which it was founded, and if conservatism is truly committed to upholding those values, than we must defend evolution-and the values of science and reason in general-against those who would corrupt them.

[exDemMom]

Granted evolution is just a theory. Much like the theory of gravity or electromagnetism. However I don't see folks jumping off high buildings to dispute gravity or sticking a fork in a socket to challenge electromagnetism.

Brilliant point.