Why do people that know nothing about evolution criticize and mock it?

The question was made for Mike? I think you're forgetting Owen there.

"I dont accept it because i dont see enough credible evidence." Followed very closely by "I have never truly studied charles darwins evolution."

Face palm.......... How can such ignorance still permeate our society in (dang near) 2013? If you haven't studied it then how do you know if there's credible evidence to support it or not? If you had ever studied it you would actually know that there is an overwhelming mountain of credible evidence that not only supports it, but unequivocally proves it to be true.

Hello x i entirely agree i am a vegetarian that's my alternative they consume meat and i'll criticise them for consuming innocent animals which have been murdered and they dont care! The reason they criticise use is in view that we care like the saying you snicker at me on the grounds that i'm one of a kind i laugh at you rationale your the entire same,im an animal lover and continuously will be as a result i don't devour meat to be able to the individuals that do criticise us well uno we dont care if u can devour a lamb we will devour a carrot!

Are you some sort of a poe, given that just yesterday, you were arguing the exact opposite (see link), implying that atheism has hole in it, claiming that some cockamamie christian website had all the answers (and they are dead set against evolution and a literal interpretation of the bible)?

Or are you that confused and unable to even have a coherent thought?

-The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes.[1]

Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. As Kruger and Dunning conclude, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others" (p. 1127).[2]-

-Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).-

“Rational arguments don’t usually work on religious people. Otherwise there would be no religious people.” - Gregory House, M.D. Season 4 Episode 2 The Right Stuff.

Molecular biologist Michael Denton, writing as a non-creationist skeptic of Darwinian evolution:

A SIMPLE CELL? Many people don't realize that even the simplest cell is fantastically complex —even the simplest self- reproducing organism contains encyclopedic quantities of complex, specific information. Mycoplasma genitalium has the smallest known genome of any free-living organism, containing 482 genes comprising 580,000 base pairs" (compare 3 billion base pairs in humans). Of course, these genes are functional only in the presence of pre-existing translational and replicating machinery, a cell membrane, etc. But Mycoplasma can only survive by parasitizing other more complex organisms, which provide many of the nutrients it cannot manufacture for itself.

This is why some scientists today are now referring to evolution as a myth.

This is a well known battle field. For years I tried to stay in the middle but today, I'd say I'm 90% creationist.

You can talk science all you want, but you can not prove anything for sure.

I believe in logic. Logic and probability. I think the probability that our Creator came from another planet and placed us here is high. Why? That is the key question. How is it that we are able to survive and thrive here. Luck? Evolution?

I guess I'd like to know what information I have missed that makes you so right no this one?

Because they live their lives, and do their thinking from another platform, built on faith. They continue to argue all things from that point of view, which, to them is a given.All things are interpreted from that foundation. That being the case, evolution and it's workings have no interest for them whatsoever.

Why do people that have PhDs in the subjects that involve evolution mock evolution? There is obviously something there that causes proven intelligent and respected people to say that what is supposedly fact is missing pertinent information to make it that. All of these people are not Theists either. There are even evolutionary biologists that have admitted to important pieces missing out of the puzzle for evolution to be considered unrefutable fact.

To a degree evolution exists and all of those people agree with that. Just because evolution exists to a degree doesn't mean that it exists to the extent that a large amount of the scientific community is claiming to be factual.

two out of the 3 sources I used are not creationists or intelligent design supporters and you still give me a thumbs down? You people accuse christian's of ignoring the facts but everytime I cite one of the people that typically support your view saying that there are pieces missing you give me a thumbs down... It sucks that your facts don't hold up to unbiased judgement doesn't it?

From what I am seeing you have done plenty of criticizing and mocking yourself and you may be surprised to see that you are wrong.

We all have freedom of speech and freedom of religion as well. That is why you should look a little deeper into what you are saying either way. Atheists often have become atheists because of religion and hypocrisy. Then there are people that worship their country over God himself. That becomes their religion. It is a fact that the "flag" is an idol for many, though it should be "respected". It should not take precedence over the Almighty Creator, whose name IS JEHOVAH.

Jesus quoted as his inspired authority: “Man must live, not on bread alone, but on every utterance coming forth through Jehovah’s mouth.” “You must not put Jehovah your God to the test.” “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matt. 4:1-11)

Click: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2009724?q=Creat...

You answered your own question. It is the fact that they are uninformed that gives them room to mock and belittle.

Once you understand and accept something to be fact, what is there to do that is demeaning and ignorant?

You can relax in knowing instead of fighting to hang on to "belief."

Or relax in uncertainty without fighting to hang on to "belief."