The Scopes Monkey Trial at 100: Why People Don't Accept the Theory of Evolution

…

1. A general resistance to science. This reaction falls under the rubric of what I call the Conflicting Worlds Model of the relationship of science and religion, where one is forced to choose one over the other. In particular, if scientific discoveries do not appear to support religious tenets, believers tend to opt for religion, nonbelievers for science. 
2. Belief that evolution is a threat to specific religious tenets. Objections given to the theory of evolution of this sort often fall under the rubric of the Same Worlds Model, in which an attempt is made to use science to prove religious tenets, or to mold scientific findings to fit religious beliefs. For example, the attempt to prove that the Genesis creation story is accurately reflected in the geological fossil record has led many creationists to conclude that the Earth was created within the past 10,000 years. This is in sharp contrast to the geological evidence for a 4.6 billion-year old Earth. If one insists on the findings of science squaring true with religious doctrines, this can lead to conflict between science and religion.
3. Misunderstanding of evolutionary theory. A significant source of evolution denial (the doppelganger of Holocaust denial, in that evolution deniers use similar techniques of rhetoric and debate as Holocaust deniers),12 is that most people know so little about the theory. In a 2001 Gallup poll, for example, a quarter of the people surveyed said they didn't know enough to say whether they accepted evolution or not, and only 34 percent considered themselves to be "very informed" about the theory. Because evolution is so controversial, public school science teachers typically drop the subject entirely rather than face the discomfort aroused among students and parents. What is not taught is not learned. Even those who profess belief in the theory of evolution have a difficult time explaining how it works, typically offering a Lamarkian explanation involving the inheritance of acquired characterstics (with the iconic example of giraffs that stretch their necks to reach leaves high up on trees give birth to baby giraffs with longer necks).13
4. The fear that evolution degrades our humanity. After Copernicus toppled the pedestal of our cosmic centrality, Darwin delivered the coup de gr­ace by revealing us to be "mere" animals, subject to the same natural laws and historical forces as all other animals. Copernicus no longer generates controversy because his theory of heliocentrism is about the relative place and position of cosmic real estate, whereas Darwin's theory remains controversial because it is about us, which we take personally.
5. The equation of evolution with ethical nihilism and moral degeneration. This sentiment was expressed by the neo-conservative social commentator Irving Kristol in 1991: "If there is one indisputable fact about the human condition it is that no community can survive if it is persuaded—or even if it suspects—that its members are leading meaningless lives in a meaningless universe."14 Similar fears were raised by Nancy Pearcey, a fellow of the Discovery Institute in a briefing on Intelligent Design before a House Judiciary Committee of the United States Congress. She cited a popular song urging "you and me, baby, ain't nothing but mammals so let's do it like they do on the Discovery Channel." Pearcey went on to claim that since the U.S. legal system is based on moral principles, the only way to generate ultimate moral grounding is for the law to have an "unjudged judge," an "uncreated creator."15
6. The fear that evolutionary theory implies we have a fixed human nature. The first five reasons for the resistance to evolutionary theory come almost exclusively from the political right. This last reason originates from the political left, primarily from progressives and liberals who fear that the application of evolutionary theory to human thought and action implies that political policy and economic doctrines will fail because the constitution of humanity is stronger than the constitutions of states. This is what I call Cognitive Creationism—evolution from the neck down—the doppelganger of Conservative Creationism.16

…

Michael Shermer

https://www.skeptic.com/article/scopes-monkey-trial-at-100-what-it-tells-us-about-why-people-dont-accept-the-theory-of-evolution/