Evolution is random! Stop saying it isn't!

I think this shows a divergence between the actual definition and the common usage. I think many uneducated people do think that "random" means "equiprobable". Further, I think they'd be confused by even a probability distribution of two six-sided dice, because the result of 7 is so much more likely than that of, say, 2.Further, I suspect that the creationist demagog's frequent use of "random" to mean "equiprobable, unpredictable, undirected and wildly out of control" has reinforced this. Perhaps another example of the dumbing-down effect of fundamentalism.It can be jarring sometimes, but many of us can forget that by simply having a PhD or MD, we are different from
97% in the US, who don’t have a Ph. D. or a Professional degree, and certainly the over 75% who don’t even have a bachelor’s degree (data from Figure 2, http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-24.pdf).As such, we can’t expect everyone to think the same or have knowledge of even English definitions to the same degree.Add to this (as has already been mentioned), that without a little thought, most people don’t realize that a non-controlled process can be non-equiprobable. I know that sounds silly, since even two six-sided dice are a good illustration of a noncontrolled process giving a predictable result, but that seems to be how people have been told to think. Thus, when a creationist tells them that evolution can’t be true being that everyone knows that all non-human-directed process is “random” (meaning equiprobable, unpredictable, undirected and wildly out of control), they swallow it. In other words, the charlatan propagates the idea that a process is *either* intelligently directed OR it must be out of control, unpredictable, equiprobable, and unable to create anything more orderly or complex than it’s beginning materials.I think THAT’s the root of this whole discussion, and indeed the root of one of the most effective ways creationists persuade people to be anti-science.

---

-Equinox_ _ _ ___ _ _ _
You know, it's probably already answered at An Index to Creationist Claims...
(Equinox is a Naturalistic Pagan -  Naturalistic Paganism Home)

Doddy-A clarification page on this is a good idea for the wiki - especially one that explains the bait and switch tactic used. (creationists first claim evolution is random using one definition, then change to a different definition). I like starting out listing the definitions as you did, but have to admit that your paragraph on the 747 seems to get mired in the analogy without saying what we need to say.I’m too busy right now to get to that, but I do hope to contribute to the wiki, and am glad to see how much work you’ve done on it.
Have a good day-