notMichaelJackson

Every single Creationist I've encountered, both in real life and on the Internet, has failed to demonstrate an adequate knowledge of the theory of evolution. I have heard and read several strawman versions of evolution from them, but never a scientific one.

Examples:
"Humans evolved from apes. What a bunch of crap."
"Do you realy think that two asteriods collided and then there was all this bacteria to start evolving?"
"Please prove that the stars, planets, galaxies, and societies came into existance through the general theory of evolution."

How can they refute or even deny evolution if they don't even know what it is?

NonHomogenized

I've never met a creationist that knew a damn thing about evolution.
Indeed, every skeptic of evolution that I've met had lousy information on the subject, or sorely lacking information in some areas. Or they appealed to an argument from ignorance that made me want to hit my head very hard against a wall for an hour or two, just so I could feel like I was doing something more productive.

notMichaelJackson

Creationists, please read Talk Origins Introduction to Evolutionary Biology and What is Evolution before continuing in an future debates on the subject. It will benefit you because you will appear less ignorant, and evolutionists will be less annoyed.

The Definition of Biological Evolution according to Talk Origins:
[Edited to rearrange two words]

Asha'man

Having watched the E/C debates in this forum for a couple of years, I have found that every single argument against Evolution is based entirely on ignorance and lies.

Clearly, ignorance is the larger problem, but there are people out there who must be spreading deliberate lies. Those people who are spreading the lies may actually understand evolution, but it's hard to tell.

Jayjay

I think that the "inner party" creationists understand evolution, and deliberately lie to their followers (and themselves). At the very least these highly educated creation "scientists" are perfectly capable of understanding evolution, so they have no excuse.

(Hmm... I'd like eavesdrop on creationist conversations some time. For example, the stuff they say behind close doors when trying to figure out ways to discredit dating methods or somesuch. I wonder if they use the same rhetorics as they do with their propaganda material, or if they all admit that their criticism is pathetic but they'll have to keep on doing it anyway?)

pz

I don't think they do understand it. Johnson, for instance, doesn't have a clue -- he clearly does not read the scientific literature and would be incapable of understanding it if he did. Wells has gone through the formalities of a Ph.D., but with no interest in actually engaging with the subject. It was all pretense with no substance, and his writings reveal the workings of a third-rate mind. Virtually all the creationists/IDists I've talked to or read just aren't that smart in science. Don't overestimate them.

I think there are a few exceptions. Behe did competent work in biochemistry. He's not very familiar with the evolution literature, though, and he got sucked into this whole sociopolitical shell game with the Discovery Institute, and now he can't get out. He's smart enough that he could learn, if he didn't like his ID blinkers so much. From what I've read of Kurt Wise, he seems to be thoughtful enough...but he willfully denies evolution in spite of all the evidence he is fully aware of.

MrDarwin

Behe is probably better described as a "theistic evolutionist". He explicitly accepts both an ancient universe (and earth) and the common descent of life. As such, I always find it amazing that creationists, especially YECs, adore him so much.

Radcliffe Emerson

The Creationists I know don't even realize they contradict several of their own beliefs most of the time, let alone anything about evolution.

emotional

My rabbis (Orthodox Jewish YECs) taught me that evolution was the theory of complex organisms arising by random chance alone. It was very easy for me to reject such a theory. It was only when I bought and read Dawkins' Blind Watchmaker that my ideas about evolution were corrected.

NonHomogenized

While Dawkins is being mentioned, I've heard a lot of bitching about him, and I don't really get it. I own A River Out of Eden, and, while it's not perfect, I consider it to be an exceptionally good book, with remarkably clear, concise information.