Why Evolution is True and Why Many People Still Don't Believe It (Jerry Coyne, 2012)

Jerry Coyne, a professor of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago and author of the seminal book, Why Evolution is True, is one of the world's most eloquent defenders of evolutionary science in the face of legal, religious, and cultural opposition. In this talk, Coyne explored the evidence for evolution, why Americans are so resistant to accepting the theory, and what can be done to make the country more evolution-friendly.

His book, Why Evolution is True: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-T...

and blog: http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/

Here is the chart showing the acceptance of evolution according to country: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ne...

46% of Americans believe humans were created in the past 10,000 years:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hol...

Science, Religion, and Society: The Problem of Evolution in America, by Jerry Coyne - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10...

Evolution Matters Lecture Series, features scientists from Harvard and around the world who are on the cutting-edge of advancing our understanding of evolutionary science--from the origins of life to the genetics behind human adaptations. Supported by a generous gift from Drs. Herman and Joan Suit.
http://www.hmnh.harvard.edu/lectures-...

• Category

  Science & Technology

[Bendig12]

The simple answer, which I assume you want because it is the only thing you can deal with, is because the weight of the evidence IS overwhelming.

Again, I find it hard to understand that someone who claims to be a member of MENSA sand majored in science should ask this question.

If this is an attempt to reason Socratically, I think you need to consider the possibility that your critic has already done so and maybe more skilled in this technique than you evidently are.

[GameParodyGuy]

That's not what I said. See, that's your problem. You have a warped perception of reality and a poor reading comprehension ability. You are also unable to accurately perceive or understand the concept of evolution (that was made clear by your stupid comment when you stated that "there is no proof that fish can turn into monkeys", a claim that no real evolutionist ever made).

The point of bringing up the pupa to butterfly example is to demonstrate how animal transformation is a reality.

[Bendig12]

You said nothing in your previous post. You have made arguments from ignorance. If you haven't studied philosophy, I suggest you do. It will help you identify the fact you are using logical fallacies to argue your case. And in case you didn't understand the significance of that statement, I am saying that the logic of your claims are flawed. Check wiki or whatever you like to understand the basic blunders you are making. Again, this is not what I would expect from someone who claims to be bright

[Bendig12]

Do you understand the difference between evidence and proof. How much do you know about philosophy? I am seriously struggling to understand HOW you majored in biology when you seem to lack a basic understanding of science and the scientific method. You do understand that science has it origins in philosophy don't you?

[GameParodyGuy]

I agree! I get a sense of strong emotions embedded within his statements. (I think his stance is heavily influenced by emotions rather than objectivity.)

[Bendig12]

You majored in biology AND you claim to be a member of MENSA? Please tell me this is a joke and we can both have a belly roll?

[Bendig12]

But I was not discussing the people, I was discussing the science and how it supports evolution. You miss the point once again. I am seriously beginning to wonder if you are a member of mensa. You make staggering errors in reasoning. Is your problem arrogance? You think you know more than you actually do?

[Bendig12]

Clearly, your knowledge is not sufficient. The very fact you make this statement demonstrates to me that you COMPLETELY missed the point.

[Bendig12]

Indeed, argumentum ad populum. I haven't bothered to pick this poster up on this issue - he doesn't know what an argument from authority is, so there is no hope he will know what this is, or why it is a logical fallacy. He believes he knows everything, but his posts reveal a profound ignorance in many subjects. He claims to be a member of MENSA, but I struggle to understand this given some of the comments made here demonstrate anything but the reasoning ability one would expect.

[Bendig12]

Well, for a major in biology and being a member of MENSA, I am staggered that you would even deign to even make such a comment, let alone believe you should stand behind it on a public forum.

Do you really think that this is the place to discuss such issues? It is comments like this that reveal to me that in some key senses, you are utterly clueless about the subject, and hence what would be involved in substantiating such a statement.

In short this is very disappointing. I hoped for better.