U.S. Lags World in Grasp of Genetics and Acceptance of Evolution

That's what I get for not reading it all the way through.

Iceland, then! Thanks. No wonder I was surprised.
Hmm, Ireland still beats the US by a quite a lot.

READ?!

Good lord, am I expected to do everything around here?

I would like to see how the question was posed in the survey. I don't know a lot of people who don't leave the door at least cracked for some form of intelligent design. And I know only one or two people who reject evolution. If the question was posed in such a way as to suggest that evolution is the ONLY explanation for all species, most people I know would almost certainly say no. Would that then be recorded as rejecting evolution?

I cannot believe that the number of people who reject evolution in the United States is as high as reflected in the graph.

This is from a Gallup poll on the topic from May 2008:



More interesting statistics in the complete poll.

Foxy, did you follow the link that followed the graph in the OP?

The question is there.



I do think it's encouraging that more people in the U.S. are unsure about the answer than was the case 20 years ago. Also .

The questions in German were (2005 survey, for Germany, Switzerland and Austria):

1. God has created all types of life directly, as written in the bible,

2. life on earth was created either by God or by a higher creature, underwent a lengthy development process, controlled by God or a higher creature

3. life on earth is without influence of a higher power and has emerged in a naturally.

"Alte Bundesländer" are the states in the old Federal Republic, "Neue Bundesländer" those in the former GDR.

'Römisch-katholisch' is Roman Catholic, Evangelisch is Evangelical, 'Konfessionslos mean 'without religion'.
'Kirchenmitglieder-Regelmäßige Kirchgänger' are those who go regularily to church on Sundays.

My note:
[Roman Catholic: 31%; Evangelicals: 30.8%; without religion: 32.5% (data 2005)]
About 3.5% of Evangelicals go on a 'normal' Sunday to church service as do 12.4% of Catholics ( (data 2004/5)





I must admit that I'd never thought such result to be possible.

That is really interesting Walter. But again, I think if you sit down with people to get their full range of feelings/beliefs/knowledge on the issue, you will find a large percentage of those who believe in some form of Higher Power will usually accept that such Higher Power had at least something to do with evolution as we understand it now. In other words, I think most people's beliefs are a composite of both and a rejection of neither.

I think if you asked most people in the United States whether they considered Evolution to be part of God's (by whatever name they choose to call that Higher Power) process of Creation, I think the large majority would say yes.

I won't even guess what percentage would say yes, but I bet it would be larger than what is reflected in Robert's graph. The subject doesn't lend itself well to simple yes and no answers, however, to get the full range of nuanced views on that subject.

Foxfyre, have you read the entire article that was linked to in the original post?

Yes ehBeth I did read the entire article though I didn't follow the attached links. And it does not address the points I'm making here. I have spent hours and hours and hours studying, debating, making posts on message boards, and teaching this stuff, and the positions you see in all such settings are just as fixed and polarized as what you see in this thread.

What I am saying, if you put it in a non accusatory, non threatening, non ridiculing setting and actually draw people out on what they actually do thnk and believe, it will come out much differently than what is reflected in the graph. I believe with the ability to put one's conceptions into the proper nuanced context, you'll find that the majority of people embrace at least in some way both, and reject neither in entirety.

Just other words for the same daftitude.

Who cares what the "the proper nuanced context" for stupidity is. It should be ridiculed because it's stupid.

Why? Do you have special insight or expertise to explain to such folks precisely why they are wrong?

Or do you call them (or me) (or what they say) stupid just because you don't see it the way they see it?

Which point of view leaves more room for objectivity, new information, open-mindedness, possibilities, ability to learn?

This is a study from a science publication and isn't about making people feel good about their stupidity or trying to argue it with them. It's about measuring how many of the stupid people there are.

Oh okay. I misunderstood. I thought it was to invite a discussion of the study itself. Had I realized it was simply to pretend to measure stupid people, I probably wouldn't have posted at all.

But oh well. You guys are doing a good job here. Carry on.

No worries, nobody's perfect and a lot of people believe the same stupidity. Don't beat yourself up too much over it.

Oh well thank you. How nice of you to be concerned.

I hope you aren't too distressed that I know those 'stupid people' are far more open minded than those who call them stupid too. But don't worry about that really. You have quite a bit of company in your point of view here on A2K.

Of course I'm not distressed about having my mind as wide open as theirs. I want to keep the stupid stuff out.

That's odd. That's the precise argument that the handful of true Creationists in the USA use to try to keep evolution out of the science curriculum.

So? Defending stupidity with an argument isn't the same as defending the rejection of stupidity with the argument. The problem isn't the argument but the stupidity.

Indeed. Almost as stupid as those who think being open minded is more likely to further better education than being close minded. You see the arguments you have labeled 'stupid' express as much opposition to those Creationists as you do because the folks making them see those Creationists as close minded as you say that you are.

But oh well. Again, I wish you well with the thread.