Misconceptions about Evolution and the Mechanisms of EvolutionSlide 2Slide 3Slide 4Slide 5Slide 6Slide 7Slide 8Slide 9Slide 10Slide 11Slide 12Slide 13Slide 14Slide 15Slide 16Slide 17Slide 18Slide 19Slide 20Slide 21Slide 22Slide 23Slide 24Slide 25Slide 26Slide 27Slide 28Slide 29Slide 30Misconceptions about Evolution and the Mechanisms of EvolutionAdapted from Understanding Evolution, a website developed by the University of California Museum of Paleontology with support provided by the National Science Foundation and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.Unfortunately, people have misconceptions about evolution •Some are simple misunderstandings •Some are ideas that develop in the course of learning about evolution, possibly from school experiences and/or from the media. •Other misconceptions may stem from purposeful attempts to interfere with the teaching of evolution.Evolution and How it Works•Misconceptions are unfortunately very common. •Most of these misunderstandings have to do with assumptions that evolution proceeds in a particular direction or that individual living things can choose to adapt.“Evolution is a theory about the origin of life.”•Evolution deals mainly with how life changed after its origin. •Science does try to investigate how life started but not as the central focus of evolutionary theory. •Whether or not we understand how life began, we do understand a lot about what happened during the history of life.•Natural selection weeds out individuals that are unfit in a particular situation.•For evolution, “good enough” is good enough. No organism has to be perfect. •They are not marching up a ladder of progress but need to be fit enough to survive and reproduce.•Other taxa may have changed and diversified a great deal—but that doesn’t mean they got “better.” •What works “better” in one location might not work so well in another. Fitness is linked to environment, not to progress. “Evolution is like a climb up a ladder of progress; organisms are always getting better.”•Chance is certainly a factor in evolution, but there are also non-random evolutionary mechanisms. •Random mutation is the ultimate source of genetic variation •Natural selection, the process by which some variants survive and others do not, is not random. •To say that evolution happens “by chance” ignores half of the picture. “Evolution means that life changed ‘by chance.’ ”“Natural selection involves organisms ‘trying’ to adapt.” •Natural selection leads to adaptation, but the process doesn’t involve “trying.”•Natural selection involves genetic variation and selection among variants present in a population.•An individual has genes that are good enough to survive and reproduce, or it does not.“Natural selection gives organisms what they ‘need.’ ”•Natural selection has no intentions or senses. •If genetic variation allows some individuals to survive a particular challenge better than others, they will have more offspring in the next generation, and the population will evolve. •If not in the population, the population may still survive (but not evolve much) or it may die out. •But it will not be granted what it “needs” by natural selection.Evidence Regarding EvolutionMany of the misconceptions about the evidence supporting evolution have been planted in the minds of the public through antievolution propaganda. The following notions may appear compelling at first glance, but are easily debunked with a little information.Scientific theories are explanations that are based on lines of evidence, enable valid predictions, and have been tested in many ways. In contrast, there is also a popular definition of theory—a “guess” or “hunch.” These conflicting definitions often cause unnecessary confusion about evolution. “Evolution is ‘just’ a theory.”“Evolution is a theory in crisis and is collapsing as scientists lose confidence in it.” Debate is not whether evolution (descent with modification) took place, but how it took place. Details of the processes and mechanisms are vigorously debated. Evolution is sound science and is treated accordingly by scientists and scholars worldwide. ‘Project Steve’ and bogus lists of scientists who don’t support evolution“Gaps in the fossil record disprove evolution.” There are lots of transitional forms. What counts as transitional? When has something changed ‘enough?’That transitional fossils are not preserved does not disprove evolution. Science actually predicts that for many evolutionary changes there will be gaps in the record.“Evolutionary theory is incomplete and is currently unable to give a total explanation of life.” Evolutionary science is a work in progress. New discoveries & new hypotheses made to explain them—just like other sciencesWe can’t know everything about evolution but…We do know a great deal about the history of lifeEvolution is the only well-supported explanation for life’s diversity.“The theory of evolution is flawed, but scientists won’t admit it.” No support for creationists claims about flaws. Usually they are misunderstandings of evolution or misrepresentations of evidence. Scientific refinement process doesn’t mean there are flaws.Scientific method is mean to point out any real flaws.“Evolution is not science because it is not observable or testable.” •Evolution is observable and testable. •Science is not limited to controlled experiments Actually, much is accomplished by gathering evidence from the real world and inferring how things work. •Multiple lines of evidence allow valid and useful inferences“Most biologists have rejected ‘Darwinism’ (i.e., no longer really agree with the ideas put forth by Darwin and Wallace).”•Evolution generally proceeds at a slow, deliberate pace but can proceed at a relatively rapid pace under some circumstances. •In this sense, “Darwinism” is continually being modified.•Modification is how things work in science. •No credible challenges to the basic Darwinian principles so far.•Scientists have not rejected Darwin’s natural selection, but have improved and expanded it.The statement:Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates