Why do many people take evolution as fact if even Darwin confessed it could never truly work and there has to be a greater being who created this beautiful and unique planet?

Answer 1

Other answers from our community:Evolution as a fact The attempts of the author of the question to "steer" the reader into a "creationist state of mind" are obvious, and since the "guidance toward creationism" was included, discussion will address the question and will touch on creationist ideas.

The reason many people take evolution as fact is because it is. Modern evolutionary synthesis (MES) is the current "state of the art" model. And because of the overwhelming quantity of evidence supporting it, evolution, that is, MES, is taken as fact by almost all the scientific community. The assembled facts do not include any specifics as regards the mechanism behind the genesis of life itself. It is interesting to note that the competing theory offered by creationists has no detailed information in this regard either. Both camps suggest that lightning animated mud or the like, and that's it. But because of the lack of even a single shred of emperical evidence, there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that points to a "greater being" (an über-intelligent and technologically advanced unidentified alien life form?) as the cause of that lightning bolt. The idea of MES is extraordinarily unpopular with creationist theoreticians because it presents such an immense barrier to any "real" proof of their own ideas, particularly if they wish an endorsement as "science" and not philosophy. The creationist strategy to (re)model creationism as something that could be "passed off" as scientific (under the "new and improved" label of Intelligent Design, or ID) is documented in Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District. Nowhere in MES is there any theoretical speculation that denies God. And God is not disproved by any aspect of MES. Most advanced thinkers accept evolution as a fact the way it is presented in MES. And the ranks of those who agree with MES include great numbers of non-believers and Christians alike. Links are provided. Answer Darwin never really doubted the validity of his theory once fully developed in his mind. Some have circulated the idea that he 'repented on his death-bed', although this appears to have no basis in fact and should not be given any credibility as an argument. In any case, even if Darwin did 'repent' on his death-bed that would not have any effect on the validity or otherwise of his theory. It is either scientific or it is not.

What is true is that he expressed some reservations about the fossil record which at that time, did not show the many transitional forms which his theory predicted. He believed that in time these gaps would be filled as many more fossils were uncovered.

"Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record."

Charles Darwin, 'On the imperfection of the geological record', Chapter X, The Origin of Species, J.M Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971, pp. 292-293.

Darwin also made some other statements which could be taken to mean that he was uncertain about his theory. Some have also taken the great length of time that it took him to publish the 'origin' as meaning this. It would appear that such ideas are unfounded, although he did express himself thus:

"For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question; and this is here impossible."

Charles Darwin, 1859, Introduction to Origin of Species,p2. Also quoted in 'John Lofton's Journal', The Washington Times, 8 February 1984. Answer {Note: Before making the comment below I wish to state categorically that I am not in favor of Creation being taught in public schools.}

Answer

One reason I believe that many people take evolution as fact is simply because this is what they have been taught in school whether it be the public system or elsewhere. This would apply at whichever level of education is being referred to. I am here talking about the majority. Most people would therefore have no knowledge of: 1. Problems with the theory of evolution itself -as stated by evolutionists themselves 2. Any alternative scientific theories and their contents and arguments. Included in this ignorance is not just a lack of knowledge of alternative theories, but of data used to support the theory of evolution which has been found to be either fraudulent or no longer scientifically defensible in the light of new data. Since a number of frauds such as the Peppered Moths of England and Haeckel's doctrine of Embryonic Recapitulation have been exposed relatively recently, many people are simply unaware of this. So in the popular mind the original finding still stands. As well, many new discoveries are lauded as 'missing links' when discovered, with much fanfare, even though the evidence may only be fragmentary. Further evidence and scientific investigation often overturns the original findings, yet this 'scientific correction' does not receive the same attention or publicity. Pakicetus would be one example of this.

Further to this, the education system fails to present any of the various problems with the data and scientific laws which contradict evolution.

Answer

The question alludes to the argument from design which was in Darwin's day put forward by William Paley. It has been suggested that one of Darwin's reasons for putting forward his theory was to refute the arguments of Paley.

Answer 2

It is hard to answer a question when the question itself tries to rule out the answer, by declaring the beliefs of creationists to be the only acceptable truth. Perhaps it would be best to start with the position that some of the world's Church leaders have adopted on evolution.
The position of the Catholic Church is as follows:
Pope Pius XII stated in his encyclical Humani Generis(1950) that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith and that he considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis; Pope John Paul II, in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1996), said that new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis; Pope Benedict has refused to endorse "intelligent design" theories, instead backing "theistic evolution" which considers that God created life through evolution with no clash between religion and science.

The position of the Episcopal Church is as follows:

The Episcopal Church has said that the theory of evolution does not conflict with Christian faith. In 2006, the General Convention affirmed, via Resolution A129, that God is creator and added that "the theory of evolution provides a fruitful and unifying scientific explanation for the emergence of life on earth, that many theological interpretations of origins can readily embrace an evolutionary outlook, and that an acceptance of evolution is entirely compatible with an authentic and living Christian faith."

The other Protestant Churches do not, in the main, have a central position on evolution. However, the Archbishop of Canterbury and leader of the world's Anglicans, Dr Rowan Williams, has said that he opposes the teaching of creationism in schools, saying that "creationism is ... a kind of category mistake ... My worry is creationism can end up reducing the doctrine of creation rather than enhancing it".

As we see, the Catholic position has slowly developed from seeing evolution as a serious hypothesis worthy of investigation, to recognition that it can now be accepted as more than a hypothesis, to acceptance of theistic evolution. The Anglican leader is more ambivalent, but certainly does not support creationism. The reason for this, and for so many people recognising evolution as fact, is scientific evidence. It is possible for people to be Christians and accept evolution, at least in the sense of the "theistic evolution".