It has nothing to do with superstitions. Deep down people know when they are being rolled by "experts". When scientist use intimidation and ridicule to supress any discussion of alternatives to evolution, people begin to wonder what is going on.
It may be that evolution will be generally accepted. Before that happens it would help if there could be some compelling evidence to support it and if there could be an open robust examination of the evidence without the rancor and namecalling that seems to characterize the debate.
It was, 50 years ago, outside all but a small cadre of Biblical lieralists. That, IMO, is about as 'generally accepted' as it's ever going to be.
Before that happens it would help if there could be some compelling evidence to support it and if there could be an open robust examination of the evidence without the rancor and namecalling that seems to characterize the debate.
The evidence, from fossils, genetics, phyolgeny, population biology, etc., is compelling to anyone who will permit hiimself to be compelled.
No, personally, I think the reason people reject evolution is that most people don't study biology beyond their high school biology class. In such a class they get only a very simplified and in many cases incorrect idea of what evolution is about. I personally have time and time again run into people, for example who believe that the theory of evolution deals with the origin of life. I have encountered many who say that it teaches that there is no God. I have also met many who say that "It's just a theory. There's no proof. If there were proof it would be the LAW of evolution." All of these indicate a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution, and in the case of the second and third examples, a lack of understanding of science in general. I think people would accept evolution better if it was presented as a scientific explanation of the variation that exists in living things without all of the religious overtones. It should be pointed out that it makes no mention of God at all, and that there is significant evidence in support of it, but that, like any other scientific theory, there is not absolute proof of it.
Please name one scientific theory that has been proposed as an alternative to evolution.
> Deep down people know when they are being rolled by "experts".
Yes. Most people get that feeling whenever a preacher other than their own starts yapping.
> When scientist use intimidation and ridicule to supress any discussion of alternatives to evolution
Not happening. Discuss alternatives all you want. But don't try to pass off religion as science. ID is just the same old Creationist claptrap in a cheap suit.
> it would help if there could be some compelling evidence to support it
The fossil record is quite enough on it's own.