why is gradualism still taught as a major force of evolution?

[Schadenfroh]

Notice that there are not many intermediate species in the fossil record. Why the hell are our children still having this idea shoved down their throats? In high school it was taught to me that this was the only way species emerged, slow changes over a very long period of time. While it can be seen in certain instances, it is not the main cause of new species, IMO. Why is punctuated equilibrium (long periods of little change followed by periods of rapid change) not taught more? It has better evidence in the fossil record, such as the fossil bed in Lake Turkana.

 

[HappyPuppy]

OMGWHFYOUARESOFVCKINGSMART!!!!

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Learn both ways, choose the one you like.

 

[lobadobadingdong]

evolution is scientific theory(imo incorrect theory), not fact (they still haven't proven it)

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
evolution is scientific theory(imo incorrect theory), not fact (they still haven't proven it)

not speaking of evolution as a whole, referring to one of darwin's theories. Personally, im not a big darwin fanboy. I am more of a Mendel fanboy, most of the ideas darwin "came up with" had been around for a while, he just sumerized them and put forth more evidence.

 

[Ogg]

I miss Stephen Jay Gould 🙁

 

[BullyCanadian]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Notice that there are not many intermediate species in the fossil record. Why the hell are our children still having this idea shoved down their throats? In high school it was taught to me that this was the only way species emerged, slow changes over a very long period of time. While it can be seen in certain instances, it is not the main cause of new species, IMO. Why is punctuated equilibrium (long periods of little change followed by periods of rapid change) not taught more? It has better evidence in the fossil record, such as the fossil bed in Lake Turkana.

I learned Punctuated Equilibrium in high school grades 11 and 12

 

[yhelothar]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
evolution is scientific theory(imo incorrect theory), not fact (they still haven't proven it)

So?
Electricity is still a theory, the existance of atoms is still a theory.
But these theories has been confirmed and explained to such a degree that knowledgable people accept it as a fact.
Evolution is no different.

Notice that there are not many intermediate species in the fossil record. Why the hell are our children still having this idea shoved down their throats? In high school it was taught to me that this was the only way species emerged, slow changes over a very long period of time. While it can be seen in certain instances, it is not the main cause of new species, IMO. Why is punctuated equilibrium (long periods of little change followed by periods of rapid change) not taught more? It has better evidence in the fossil record, such as the fossil bed in Lake Turkana

Evolution theory is basically survival of the fittest. The ones that don't adapt die off, and the ones that do survive. Your description makes it sound like they mutate slowly due to time, which is not the case.

 

[OS]

All you people bitching about evolution and sh*t should just go major in bio and look how everything works instead of bitching how everyone in biology is wrong.

 

[Sahakiel]

Originally posted by: OS
All you people bitching about evolution and sh*t should just go major in bio and look how everything works instead of bitching how everyone in biology is wrong.

Making noise is easier.

 

[SacrosanctFiend]

It's still relatively new (it was published around '77, right?), so it'll take a while to be widely accepted. The Biodiversity course I took in college was based around punctuated equilibrium.