Creationists always seem to be a century behind in their understanding of evolution. Any time I get into any kind of conversation related to evolution online, they always throw out the same old canards, most of which were dealt with by Darwin himself, but none of which show any insight or comprehension of evolutionary theory.
Take this recent article by Apologetics Press:
Altruism is in direct conflict with evolutionary theory. Yet, evolutionists always have been able to put a spin on it. As Buchanan acknowledged: “For several decades, researchers have had a possible explanation: apparently selfless acts are nothing of the kind, but are instead a clever way of promoting individual self-interest” (2005).
The article they’re citing, by the way, is from New Scientist magazine: a periodical that’s been on my shit list for quite some time now, for giving a platform to pseudo-scientific, quasi-creationist nonsense. And I’m not alone.
Anyway, just that first sentence should make anyone with a good understanding of evolutionary theory roll their eyes. Aside from the fact that nature is full of perfectly clear examples of altruism both intraspecies, and interspecies, the very basis of evolution relies on the fact that species depend on one another for survival (lions depend on wildebeests, wildebeests depend on grass, etc.), and that “good behavior” within a species is every bit as attractive a quality to the opposite sex as good hunting skills.
Why can’t creationists seem to grasp this? It’s pretty simple. They don’t know, because they don’t want to know. Any good research into the subject might shake up their worldview, and so it’s easier to just spread misinformation to reinforce other misguided people’s beliefs than to actually look at the objective scientific evidence.