This Sunday is Charles Darwin's birthday and almost 150 years have passed since his On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection was first published.
Although Darwin's work and that of other naturalists at the time, including Alfred Wallace, have revolutionized research in biology, detractors have rejected many of their conclusions - The Theory of Evolution obviously being the most popular one.
"It's quite a challenge to talk about Darwin and evolution," said Anna Bess Sorin, a visiting assistant professor in the department of biology.
Sorin, an evolutionary biologist who delivered a lecture at the Central Library on Darwin and evolution last Sunday, said his theory has arguably changed human thought, but also stirred a considerable amount of controversy, especially from fundamentalist groups.
Like many other evolutionary biologists and experts in the field, Sorin said much of evolution is generally misunderstood on certain aspects.
"People say it's just a theory," she said.
However, to simply claim evolution as "just a theory" would mean Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity and the Theory of Gravity are "just theories" as well, therefore discarding their validity, Sorin said.
Theories are basically formed after much observation, research and experiments have been conducted and the results provide facts and proof about present situations. However, the majority of people, who have not been involved in any scientific fields, usually interpret it as a blindfolded guess, Sorin said.
Darwin's research led him to determine that all living things on Earth have one common root of creation. In turn he was able to conclude his theory of natural selection, which explained the origin of species and how they adapted to eventually become what they are.
"You can base it on fossil evidence," said Michael Stribling, a junior biology major who also read Origins of Species.
"You can even look at how adaptation worked for other species and us. It just proves Darwin's ideas to me."
Stribling said one of the misconceptions that has alarmed him the most inside the general population has been the relation between humans and apes.
He said such confusions are reasons why so many, especially fundamentalists, have dispelled evolution entirely.
"He never even came close to saying anything like that," Stribling said.
Sorin said much of evolution through adaptation is even proven through certain animal features, which help them survive in their given environment.
"We saw animals that live in caves and the dark and ended up losing their vision," she said.
Sorin said animals that live in similar environments have similar physical features, such as the white fur on polar bears and other creatures of the arctic regions.
Even for animals where sexual selection was the means for survival, concepts for their features were similar. Examples were proven with male deer antlers where larger ones gave that particular deer a much better chance in finding a partner and breeding. The same held true for male peacocks, where the more elusive their tails, the higher their chances.
Humans are no exception either, Sorin said.
"As you leave the African environment, you don't experience as much radiation from the sun and it is cooler," she said. "At that point it becomes advantageous to lose that pigment in the skin."
However, in terms of popularity, Darwin and evolution may not be on the positive side throughout America.
For the past 20 years, Gallup polls have shown at least 44 percent of Americans have completely rejected evolution, while no fewer than 30 percent in 2001 have accepted both spiritual and evolutionary methods to the creation of life. Also in 2001, 12 percent believed in evolution without any spiritual involvement.
CBS News Polls on Oct. 23, 2005, showed 51 percent of Americans refused evolution while 30 percent accepted both and 15 percent accepted only evolution.
Terrance Young, a sophomore English major and devout Christian, said there should be nothing wrong with accepting both methods of creation and development.
"God placed us here and gave us a particular form," he said. "However, as the environment changes, of course mankind has to adapt.
"For instance, if lived on a mainland and ate meat all the time, but then moved to an island where I ate fish all the time, then there will be some changes."
