Misconceptions about evolution

They may be the result of experiences in schools or from the media. Other misconceptions may arise from the planned and organized attempts to interfere with the study of evolution * An article prepared at the University of Berkeley, which provides teachers with tools on how to explain what evolution is to their students who have heard about this theory with inaccurate details

For those who want to go deeper - the biological aspect of evolution (hundreds of articles) In the concentration of scientists of evolution and nature. On the history of the idea According to Darwin and the attempts of members of different religions to tattoo evolution and hinder its teaching in science The intelligent design.

The original article is on the Understanding Evolution website from the University of Berkeley, which was created by the Museum of Paleontology at the University of California, with the support of the National Science Foundation and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

We have chosen to translate at this stage a part of the site (which is divided on the original site into many pages with illustrations) that centers all the misconceptions about evolution and provides them with answers.* * * * *
Unfortunately, humans have misconceptions about evolution. Some of them are simple misunderstandings; Ideas developed during learning about evolution may be the result of experiences in schools or from the media. Other misconceptions may arise from the planned and organized attempts to interfere with the study of evolution.
As teachers, our job is to handle all of our students' questions with respect and a willingness to accept each question as a reflection of a legitimate desire to learn. However, some of the questions may be designed to harm the learning process. We have to deal with questions that are deliberately designed to interfere in ways that are not the purpose of a legitimate investigation of the field. And it is important that we learn to distinguish between the two.

Part I. Misconceptions about what evolution is and how it works
Misconceptions about the history of life and how it came about are unfortunately very common. Most of the misunderstandings are related to the hypothesis that evolution is set in a certain direction or that an individual creature can choose to adapt. We will now look at five common misunderstandings about evolution and how it works.

Misconception: Evolution is a theory about the origin of life
The answer: The theory of evolution deals mainly with the question of how life changed after it was created. Science tries to investigate how life began (did this happen, for example, in hot water fountains in the depths of the sea; which molecules were created first, etc.), but this is not at the center of the theory of evolution itself. Regardless of how life began, it subsequently branched out and diversified. Whether or not we understand how life began, we know and understand a lot about what happened throughout the history of life - although there is still much to learn.

Misconception: "Evolution is like climbing a ladder of progress, creatures always improve
Answer: It is true that natural selection weeds out individuals who are not suitable for a certain situation, but for evolution "good enough" is good enough. No creature has to be perfect. For example, many creatures (such as types of moss, mushrooms, sharks, opossums, and crayfish) have changed very little over a long period of time. They do not walk the ladder of development. Instead, they are fit enough to survive and reproduce, which is all that is needed to ensure their existence.
Other species have changed and diversified a lot - but this does not mean that they have "improved". After all, climate change, shifting river courses, invasion of new competitors and what was "better" millions of years ago have made it no better today. What works better in one area may not work well in another. Adaptation is about environment, not progress.

Misconception: Evolution means that life changed by chance
Answer: Change is a factor in evolution, but there are also non-random mechanisms. Random mutation is the ultimate source of genetic diversity, but natural selection, the process whereby some genetic variants survive and others do not, is not random.
For example, creatures living in water will survive and reproduce if they can move quickly through the water. Speed ​​helps them catch prey and escape dangers. Animals such as sharks, tuna fish, dolphins and ichthyosaurs developed a body with a flowing structure to allow them to swim fast. As they evolved, creatures with flowing bodies were more likely to survive than those without. Individuals that survived and reproduced better left more offspring that showed the same traits in the next generation. This is not a random choice. To say that evolution happens "by chance" is to ignore half the picture.

Misconception: Natural selection favors creatures that 'try' to adapt
Answer: Natural selection leads to adaptation, but the process does not require 'experience'. Natural selection involves genetic variation and choosing between the options available in the population. Every single animal has genes that are good enough to survive and breed to ones that are not good - but he cannot get the good genes through experience.
Misconception: Natural selection gives creatures what they 'need'
The answer: natural selection has no senses and no intentions. She cannot sense what a certain species 'needs'. If the population happens to have the genetic diversity that allows some of its individuals to survive a certain challenge better than others, then these individuals will have more offspring in the next generation and the population will evolve. If the genetic variation is not in the population, it can still survive (but not evolve much) or the entire population will die. But she won't get anything she needs through natural selection.

Part II Evidence about evolution
Many of the misconceptions about the evidence supporting evolution were planted in the public mind during anti-evolutionary propaganda. The following comments may be convincing at first glance, but with a little more information the lies can be exposed.

Misconception: Evolution is 'just' a theory
The response: A scientific theory is an explanation based on a variety of evidence, and enables a valid prediction and has been tested in many ways. In contrast to this there is also a popular definition of theory: a guess or a gut feeling. These conflicting definitions cause unnecessary confusion about evolution.

Misconception: a theory in crisis - evolution is a theory in crisis and it collapses as scientists lose faith in it.
The answer: the scientists do not debate whether evolution took place (with adjustments and improvements to the theory), but they do debate the question of how it became deaf. Details about the process and mechanisms are still debated among scientists. Anti-evolutionists may hear these arguments about the question of how evolution occurred and interpret this as a debate over the question of whether evolution occurred. Evolution is a solid science and is treated accordingly by scientists and teachers around the world.

Misconception: Gaps in the fossil record disprove evolution
Answer: The fact that some fossils of intermediate stages between species have not been preserved does not disprove evolution. Evolutionary biologists do not expect all intermediate forms to be found and understand that many species leave no fossils at all. Many creatures do not fossilize well and the environmental conditions that allow good fossilization are not that common. Thus science actually predicts that many evolutionary changes will be hidden behind gaps in the records.
Also, as expected, the scientists also found many fossils showing the presence of new and complex structures. For example, there are fossils of intermediate creatures between the theropod dinosaurs and modern birds, as well as between whales and their land mammal ancestors.

Misconception: the theory of evolution is incomplete and therefore cannot give us a complete explanation of life at this stage
The answer: the science of evolution is a work in progress. New discoveries allow adjustments of the explanations when necessary. And in this respect, evolution is just like all other sciences. Research continues to add to our knowledge. However, while we don't know everything about evolution (or any scientific discipline for that matter), we do know a lot about the history of life, the pattern of lineage splits over time, and the mechanisms that caused these changes. And we will learn more about it in the future. At present, evolution is the only well-supported explanation for the diversity of life.

Misconception: The theory of evolution is shaky but scientists won't admit it.
Answer: The scientists examined the "flaws" that creationists claim to exist in the theory of evolution and did not find any evidence for these claims. These "flaws" are based on a misunderstanding of the theory of evolution or a misinterpretation of the evidence. Scientists continue to refine the theory of evolution, but that does not mean it is flawed. Science is a very competitive environment and if flaws are discovered, scientists will be more than happy to point them out.

Misconception: Evolution is not science because it cannot be observed or tried
The answer: evolution can be observed and experimented. The misconception here is that science is limited to controlled experiments performed in a laboratory by people in white lab coats. In fact, most science is accomplished by gathering evidence from the real world and making inferences about how things work. Astronomers cannot hold stars in their hands and geologists cannot go back in time, but in both cases scientists can learn a lot by using multiple lines of evidence to reach valid and useful conclusions about the objects of their research. The same is true regarding the study of the evolutionary history of life on Earth, and in fact, many of the mechanisms of evolution are also studied through direct experiments like the other known sciences.

Misconception: Most biologists rejected 'Darwinism', meaning they disagreed with the ideas presented by Darwin and Wallace.

Answer: Darwin's ideas about evolution progressed at a moderate pace and were adapted to include the idea that evolution could also progress at a rapid pace under certain conditions. In this aspect, indeed, 'Darwinism' is being adjusted all the time. Adjustments of the theories to make it more suitable to show how things work is the job of the scientists and of science itself.
However, so far no valid challenges have appeared that are contrary to the basic principles according to which evolution occurs basically by the mechanism of natural selection acting against the diversity in populations and that different species have a common ancestor. Scientists did not reject Darwin's mechanism of natural selection but they improved and expanded it as more information became available. For example, today it is known (and in Darwin's time it was not yet known) that genetic mutations are the source of the diversity on which natural selection operates, but we did not reject the very idea of ​​natural selection - we only added to it.

Part C - the consequences of evolution
Evolution has only one implication - to explain the history of life. All other influences supposedly derived from the theory of evolution have been used as a hand to support the denial of evolution or to justify inhuman behavior by humans. The following two misconceptions are typical examples of what you might encounter:

Misconception: Evolution leads to immoral behavior. If children think they are animals they will start behaving like animals
Response: Humans are members of the animal kingdom. They share anatomical and biochemical features with other animals, and there are many behavioral characteristics that we share. We take care of our offspring and create cooperative groups and more. There are other behaviors specific to certain animals. In this sense, humans behave like humans, slugs behave like slugs, and a flying squirrel behaves like a flying squirrel. It is unlikely that children, because of learning the theory that relates to all other animals, will start behaving like a jellyfish or a raccoon. Linking immorality or inappropriate behavior to evolution does not make sense. Morality is not based on what exists but on what should be.

Misconception: Evolution supports the idea of ​​survival of the fittest, and justifies the control of some humans over others
The answer: In the 19th century and the beginning of the XNUMXth century, a philosophy called "social Darwinism" appeared due to misguided efforts to adapt the lesson of biological evolution to society. According to this view, society should allow the weak and least fit to fall and die, and that this is not only good policy, but also a moral duty. Apparently evolution through natural selection provided support for these ideas.
Preexisting prejudices were justified that nations under colonial control, poor or disadvantaged minorities got what they deserved because they were 'less fit' than those better off. This misapplication of science has been used to advance social and political agendas. The "science" of Social Darwinism has been disproved. Biological evolution, on the other hand, has stood the test of time, but social Darwinism has not.

Part D - Evolution and religion
The apparent incompatibility between religion and evolution has been used in many ways to convince humans to deny the history of the earth. The misconception depends on a misunderstanding of the roles of science and religion

Misconception: Evolution and religion are opposites
The response: Religion and science (evolution) are completely different things. In science (as this is reflected in science classes) only natural factors are used to explain natural phenomena, while religion discusses belief in something beyond the natural world.

The wrong claim is that a person has to choose between science and religion. Most Jewish and Christian religious groups have no conflict with the theory of evolution or other scientific findings. In fact, many religious people, including theologians, feel that a deeper understanding of nature may enrich their faith. Moreover, in the scientific community there are thousands of religious scientists who accept evolution.
(Editor's note: In my opinion and in the opinion of many there is no need at all to resolve this contradiction. Evolution is justified and that's it. Obviously when the authors, some of whom are evidently Jewish according to several characteristics on the Berkeley University website, talk about most of the Jewish religious groups, they obviously mean the Reformers. A casual conversation that I had a few years ago with Rabbi Meir Azri, one of the leaders of the movement for progressive Judaism in Israel, the movement unequivocally supports Darwin. AB)

Part XNUMX - teaching evolution
Misconceptions about whether evolution should be taught in science classes stems from confusion about the nature of science itself. Science is the way to find out how things work and it relies on empirical knowledge, not faith. Anti-evolutionists have constantly tried to mix science with faith, leading to the following misconceptions in many people's minds.

Misconception: Teachers should teach both sides and let students decide for themselves
Answer: Given a very wide range of religious views about creation, there are not exactly only 'two sides' to compare between them. In science classes, students should have the opportunity to discuss the value of arguments within the framework of science. For example, scientists debate whether the birds are direct descendants of the dinosaurs or whether their branch separated from the dinosaurs before the latter evolved. Contrary to this, a debate pitting a scientific view against a religious belief has no place in science classes, and therefore a misleading suggestion is that one must "choose" between the two. The 'fair' argument is used a lot by the creationists in an attempt to insert their religious beliefs into the science lesson system.

Misconception: Evolution is a religion, therefore requiring teachers to teach it violates the First Amendment
Answer: Evolution is science. The study of evolution relies on evidence and inferences from the natural world. Therefore it is not a religion. The Supreme Court and the other federal courts have clearly established the differences between science and religion and do not allow the promotion of religious doctrines in science classes and in general in public schools (I wish we had it. AB) Other decisions reinforced specific decisions of schools in different districts to teach evolution.

To the evolution site of UC Berkeley