When it comes to accepting evolution, gut feelings trump facts

[Tank]

But this is a taught/learned concept, that isn't intuition as I would understand it. Intuition is something that one knows instinctively and is not taught. If understanding evolution is intuitive why was there ever a point where it was not understood?

I propose for clarification
-understanding and reasoning is one part

-acquired intuition  is feelings and expectations based on previous exposure/experience
that is "intuition" for character evaluation( the vibes) complex social conditions, abstract concepts, higher conclusion

-base intuition which does not involve learning in its origin equates with body reflexes
a very limited and unconscious array of reactions to noxious to pleasurable stimuli

But as we know that a baby will look at a flame and reach out to touch it, see the edge of the bed and kneel over and fall, I doubt there is ever such a thing as base intuition which does not involve learning in its origin 

Yes we are definitly having problems with the inherent flaws in language as a communication medium. I know what's in my head, I think I understand what's in your head and I think they are close enough that I'd settle for 'acquired intuition'. Although I still don't think that's quite what I'm getting at I'll accept that definition as why evolution could be considered 'informed intuition'. However I would still contend it's not 'instinctually intuative', which is the point I was getting at. One can't just look at an organism and in isolation of further information determine how it came to be formed the way it is.

[Tank]

Tank...never have I seen such a robust collection of linkages and materials for educations...you have truly amassed a respectable collection. It will take a while but I fully plan on investigating this thread to its fullest. Thanks for putting in the time.

I started this on Richard Dawkins Forum and he liked it.

Added your History of Evolution link as it's short, sweet and to the point. If you come across anything else please drop me a PM and/or add the link to the thread.

[pytheas]

I would still contend it's not 'instinctually intuative', which is the point I was getting at. One can't just look at an organism and in isolation of further information determine how it came to be formed the way it is.

perfect, do not worry-we communicate in exelcium

to the point, a garde! therefore,

I contend the range of situations that are adequately handled by 'instinctually intuiative', reactions and responses in our animal, the human is exteremely limited. It lost validity the 'instinctually intuiative' estimation as soon as we left the caves, and planted and grew what we collected, mastered the bite of the dog and the speed of the horse.
The 'instinctually intuiative' response to driving, deep sea diving, parachuting, skiing, boarding an elevator or an airplane and seeing our picture been "taken" on paper is the one and the same =fear

hence knowing when to put back in the closet, the fear, joy and rest of kinderland alphabet playing cubes  of our mind, when its time to tidy the mess with hoover's logic, and get on the 21st century eg. with 200 new unwitnessed chemical entities circulating our bodies from inception to the grave, since 1880, may become crucial.

I do not object with bringing the 'instinctually intuiative'  alphabet playing cubes out to play ocassionally or frequently, but recommend a "hooverable" space, adherent to logical coverage should the need arise

A theory of origin of species, with species and fossils to play upon, needs a lot of fucking hoovering! why is the closet's door hanging open and the closet inside empty? Do you want us to stumble?