46% of Americans believe human beings were created in their present form within the past 10,000 years

A new poll [gallup.com] was released last week by Gallup. Given that science education in America is embarrassingly bad [nationalgeographic.com] compared to the rest of the world, I figured it would be a good idea to compile a quality list of educational resources on evolution for those interested in learning the subject.

Spread these around, and let me know if I missed any good ones.

Frequently asked questions about evolution: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution...index.html
Evolution: Fact and Theory: http://www.actionbioscience.org/e...enski.html
Evolution is a scientific fact: http://www.nationalacademies.org/...rFact.html
Understanding Evolution: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
Evolution 101: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evo...cle/evo_01
More lines of evidence: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evo...0/lines_01
Hominid Transitional Skulls: http://i50.tinypic.com/zwaxbp.jpg
Another view: http://i48.tinypic.com/16jlb48.jpg
Human Evolution: http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence
Evolution teaching resources: http://www.evoled.org/Lessons/evidence.htm
More teaching resources: http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/evol.fs.html
15 evolutionary gems: http://www.nature.com/nature/news...ongems.pdf
8 examples of evolution in action: http://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8...in-action/
Partial list of transitional forms: http://www.transitionalfossils.com/
TalkOrigins FAQ: http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs.html
Evidence for Macroevolution: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
Scientific Evidence Against a Young Earth: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evid...t_creation
The Tree of Life project: http://tolweb.org/tree/home.pages/abouttol.html
Evidence of Common Descent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evid...on_descent
Many amazing evolution documentaries: http://www.youtube.com/user/EvolutionDocumentary
More good videos on evolution: http://introducedrat.com/evolutio...EVOLUTION:

This is a "you can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink"

That being said, there's a difference between evolution and the theory of evolution. Simple changes dealing with environmental changes, toxins, etc. is one thing. The theory of evolution of where we came from is something else. Post modern Christianity has had to deal with coming up with definitions that were never defined in the past. Did Christianity NEED to define those things? No, but it did and now it must deal with those definitions.

If evolution improves the species. Why haven't we had a alligator join Mensa?

Quote from Libertarian : Evolution is a scientific fact: http://www.nationalacademies.org/...rFact.html

I can't help but think that one must blur the definition of "Evolution" or the definition of "Fact" for this to be true.

Whether someone means the anti-Creationist 'we evolved from single-celled organisms over thousands/millions of years' (big 'E') to the sometimes Creationist-accepted 'species traits/genes evolve from one generation to the next' (lil' E) is pretty important to the discussion.

As well is when defining 'fact', either being 'objective and verifyable occurance' (which big 'E' can't be, right?) to 'something accepted as true for practical purposes' (which is fine, but certainly should be considered 'Fact' next to anything that can be observed and verified).

Quote from Danman114 : I can't help but think that one must blur the definition of "Evolution" or the definition of "Fact" for this to be true. Whether someone means the anti-Creationist 'we evolved from single-celled organisms over thousands/millions of years' (big 'E') to the sometimes Creationist-accepted 'species traits/genes evolve from one generation to the next' (lil' E) is pretty important to the discussion. As well is when defining 'fact', either being 'objective and verifyable occurance' (which big 'E' can't be, right?) to 'something accepted as true for practical purposes' (which is fine, but certainly should be considered 'Fact' next to anything that can be observed and verified).

Evolution is a fact that can be witnessed and was a phenomena that was discovered even prior to Charles Darwin. Evolutionary theory is the proposed mechanism for these observable changes. Natural selection was introduced by Darwin but prior to that Lamarck had his famous theory on evolution as well.
So yes Virginia, the term 'evolution' is used as both the fact of populations of organisms changing over time and the theory of evolution of natural selection.

i don't get how this happened. i mean, i'm not that far removed (relatively speaking) from the public school system (and even one year of religious private education) and i don't recall this much resistance to evolution and science in general. i remember way back in 6th grade bio class, there were some dissenting opinions from my classmates, and i don't remember the teacher's spin, but beyond that everyone in every other class that touched upon the subject took it for granted that evolution was the real deal. is this really something that just happened in the last dozen or so years?

Quote from darkfrog : Evolution is a fact that can be witnessed and was a phenomena that was discovered even prior to Charles Darwin. Evolutionary theory is the proposed mechanism for these observable changes. Natural selection was introduced by Darwin but prior to that Lamarck had his famous theory on evolution as well. So yes Virginia, the term 'evolution' is used as both the fact of populations of organisms changing over time and the theory of evolution of natural selection.

The problem is, most Creationists believe in 'evolution' they just don't believe in 'Evolution'.

Most people agree that you can test, observe, etc., evolution in gnats or fruit flies, it's when you can't create life from whatever was before it, or you can't show a multi-cell organism evolving into an animal.

Quote from Danman114 : The problem is, most Creationists believe in 'evolution' they just don't believe in 'Evolution'. Most people agree that you can test, observe, etc., evolution in gnats or fruit flies, it's when you can't create life from whatever was before it, or you can't show a multi-cell organism evolving into an animal.

To be perfectly honest, it matters not one iota what creationists believe about evolution when their arguments and beliefs are not based on observation and testing and coming to a different conclusion but based 100% on what the bible teaches. Virtually every argument they create against evolution is usually a strawman.

It's fairly easy to be a Christian and still believe in 'Evolution or evolution', you just need to be open minded. I think this is the biggest problem between believers and non-believers, the inability to be flexible. Nothing is black and white. Plus when we assign numbers to time, it is a relative thing. According to our time scales the universe is about 13.7 billion years old and the Earth is about 4 billion years old. Of course it is silly to think that the earth was created in 6 days, days according to our definition, but if you tweak your perspective the 6 days of creation could have been billions of years in human terms.

Quote from Danman114 : The problem is, most Creationists believe in 'evolution' they just don't believe in 'Evolution'. Most people agree that you can test, observe, etc., evolution in gnats or fruit flies, it's when you can't create life from whatever was before it, or you can't show a multi-cell organism evolving into an animal.

Correct.

"In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth".

The Bible does not say whether or not God did a little "morphing" here and there in the process. I believe that it's entirely possible that is what occurred to a certain degree.

It's when people attempt to claim that there is no God who was the creator, and that the entire universe began from a single organism on it's own that I have a disagreement with. They don't believe there is a God so they have to try to come up with their own explanation for things that must exclude God from the process.

Quote from darkfrog : To be perfectly honest, it matters not one iota what creationists believe about evolution when their arguments and beliefs are not based on observation and testing and coming to a different conclusion but based 100% on what the bible teaches. Virtually every argument they create against evolution is usually a strawman.

Show us where observation and testing can prove there was a particle of something that the entire universe magically evolved from, and where that something came from, and I'll be more open to listening to your argument.

Creationists by faith believe God created the universe.

Evolutionists by faith believe the "scientists" who theorize that the universe evolved from a big bang or some unknown "something".

Quote from nobama : Show us where observation and testing can prove there was a particle of something that the entire universe magically evolved from, and where that something came from, and I'll be more open to listening to your argument. Creationists by faith believe God created the universe. Evolutionists by faith believe the "scientists" who theorize that the universe evolved from a big bang or some unknown "something".

One is a complicated hypothesis presented by experts in their field who know a hell of a lot more about science than I do.


The other is a story made up by nomads who lived in the desert who believed a pair of every species on the planet fit into a boat smaller than the titanic.

Also, neither group can prove their point. Unlike Evolution, the Big Bang is very much a theory. But it's far more credible than the bible.

The Big Bang and The Theory of Evolution are two separate fields. One is about the creation of the universe, the other is about life evolving on earth.

Quote from nobama : Show us where observation and testing can prove there was a particle of something that the entire universe magically evolved from, and where that something came from, and I'll be more open to listening to your argument.

When discussing evolution, it is much more likely you will get cogent answers if you keep the discussion to biological evolution and not conflate it with things like cosmology.

Quote from darkfrog : When discussing evolution, it is much more likely you will get cogent answers if you keep the discussion to biological evolution and not conflate it with things like cosmology.

At what stage do you consider biological evolution begins? first amino acid? first protein? first cell?