Misconceptions about evolution

[Tae Jun, Yoon]

While I was surfing the internet, I confronted with many embarrasing articles and discussion about evolution. In this writing, I'll array those misconceptions and refute those ideas.
First, many Anti-Darwinist - I don't know this term is appropriate - assert Darwinism is fiction because we can't see human evolution. Biologists and Darwinist say we can't only see the process of evolution because this occurs for thousands of years.
But I think this is not proper to contradict the idea. Nowadays, many biologists including Gould the velocity of evolution is faster than people thought. IMHO, the reason we can't see human evolution is because human is the only ideal species that can ignore the law of natural-selection. Before the development of the human intelligent, natural-selection can be applied to human species: So the size of the brain became bigger and bigger. But afer the development, we were able to think and selected by ourselves: Not by selfish genes or natural selection. Because of that, we weren't able to see the evolution of human.
Another misconception that I could discover was amazingly in the science book and in this website : So I think many biologists can have this misconception. They say in the future, people will have a large finger, big head because we only click and see the computer screen : It can be a joke, but this idea is not appropriate.
But can natural selection - if it can affect our body - be applied like this? I think NOT. this misconception is like the Lamarckism;the theory of use and disuse: If we use our arms repeatedly, then our arms will become longer and longer. We know this idea is not right. But many people still think like this. I think biologists should correct their misconceptions about evolution. Then, many anti-darwinists will agree with this great theory. So I want you to post other misconceptions you could find around your friends, people and so on.
Thank you for reading this writing.

[CoffeaRobusta]

But I think this is not proper to contradict the idea. Nowadays, many biologists including Gould the velocity of evolution is faster than people thought. IMHO, the reason we can't see human evolution is because human is the only ideal species that can ignore the law of natural-selection. Before the development of the human intelligent, natural-selection can be applied to human species: So the size of the brain became bigger and bigger. But afer the development, we were able to think and selected by ourselves: Not by selfish genes or natural selection. Because of that, we weren't able to see the evolution of human.

I don't think that it is quite correct to say that we can ignore natural selection because we can think. In my view, it's more that our ability to think and modify the world places natural selection in a different environment and our actions mitigate negative selection pressure. Don't forget that our ability to think and our intelligence is set up by those selfish genes in the first place.

[alextemplet]

We're not completely immune to natural selection. Our ability to adapt does make us much less susceptible to it than other species, but we're still not completely free from it. Disease is a prime example. Diseases such as HIV can wreak havoc in our population except among individuals that may be lucky enough to have a gene that causes immunity to that disease; thus, natural selection can work to increase the presence of this gene in the human population.

[Darby]

Examples of human evolution over "recent" times:

Variations in skin color.

Production of lactase past infancy.

Hemoglobin changes in Sherpas.

Resistance to diseases that can only evolve in connected cities.

There are many more.

[alcyon]

and besides, the so called anti-Darwinists thenselves couldn't offer a closer explaination. We'll consider their view when they come up with something better.