400 replies to this topic

[TheLoneliestMonk]

In this article there is a gallup pole that shows 61% of americans reject evolution.  WTF?  Apparently, acording to another pole I will link to when i get off of work, fewer people today believe in evolution than did 20 years ago.  20 years worth of genetic evidence in support of evolution, 20 years of research that supports evolution, and today you are more likely than ever to hear someone say "evolution is just a theory".  At the same time, I am just as likely as i was 20 years ago at age 3 to tell them "yeah, like gravity is just a theory".  in any case, MHO is that this is crazy.  is anyone else disturbed by this?  is anyone disturbed by the 40% that reject adam and eve?

[Lord of Oop North]

Adam and Eve were incestous. Gross.

[CiaranAnnrach]

Lord of Oop North, on May 1 2009, 14.08, said:

Adam and Eve were incestous. Gross.

So was Moses's family post-flood.

ETA: The Gallup Poll numbers are actually, 39% Believe, 36% have no opinion, and only 25% don't believe in it. So, that's quite a bit different than what that article would have you believe - that only 39% believe in evolution, while the other 61% believes in creationism.

ETA (again): It also appears that age plays a big factor. The elderly, the numbers across the three categories are virtually identical, while 18-35 it's a landslide for evolution.

Edited by CiaranAnnrach, 01 May 2009 - 02:18 PM.

[EHK for Darwin]

And thus we witness the fruits of decades of evangelical expansion and infiltration of American society; a population of ignorant drooling imbeciles of which 60% are preemptively unfit to study most major scientific fields. A self-imposed brain drain of enormous scale with potentially catastrophic long term consequences. Its fucking sick. I would rather have 10 more Bin Laden's than this horseshit.

For anyone who has ever doubted that Christianity is a plague, here's your evidence. Its now a pandemic and has stupified most of the population.

[Ormond]

GdMisfits, on May 1 2009, 14.06, said:

In this article there is a gallup pole that shows 61% of americans reject evolution.  WTF?  Apparently, acording to another pole I will link to when i get off of work, fewer people today believe in evolution than did 20 years ago.  20 years worth of genetic evidence in support of evolution, 20 years of research that supports evolution, and today you are more likely than ever to hear someone say "evolution is just a theory".  At the same time, I am just as likely as i was 20 years ago at age 3 to tell them "yeah, like gravity is just a theory".  in any case, MHO is that this is crazy.  is anyone else disturbed by this?  is anyone disturbed by the 40% that reject adam and eve?

Check out the original Gallup report. It does NOT say that "61% of Americans reject evolution". The question "Do you believe in evolution?" (a really simplistic way to phrase this, IMHO) had three possible answers. 39% said yes, 36% said they had no opinion, and only 25% said "No". I think only the 25% could be described as "rejecting evolution".

http://www.gallup.co...-Evolution.aspx

25% is a lot higher than I want to see, but given the state of high school biology education in the USA -- and the fact that 15% of US adults over the age of 25 have never even completed a high school degree -- I don't think we should be really surprised about those results.

Edited by Ormond, 01 May 2009 - 02:17 PM.

[EHK for Darwin]

Ormond, on May 1 2009, 14.17, said:

Check out the original Gallup report. It does NOT say that "61% of Americans reject evolution". The question "Do you believe in evolution?" (a really simplistic way to phrase this, IMHO) had three possible answers. 39% said yes, 36% said they had no opinion, and only 25% said "No". I think only the 25% could be described as "rejecting evolution".

http://www.gallup.co...-Evolution.aspx

25% is a lot higher than I want to see, but given the state of high school biology education in the USA -- and the fact that 15% of US adults over the age of 25 have never even completed a high school degree -- I don't think we should be really surprised about those results.

You don't get to be agnostic on one of the most fundamental questions of basic scientific reality. 'No opinion' is almost as stupid and ignorant as 'no' in this case. I mean would we hesitate to lament and scorn those who had 'no opinion' on whether the earth was flat or not? Same scenario here. You either believe the sky is blue, since it is in fact fucking blue, or there's something wrong with you whether you're fence sitting or firmly in the other camp. Cause quite frankly, there's no fucking fence to sit on. This is about as either/or as you get. If your answer is maybe, you're still dumb.

Edited by EHK for Darwin, 01 May 2009 - 02:22 PM.

[TheLoneliestMonk]

*hugs EHK*

thank you.

[Ormond]

EHK for Darwin, on May 1 2009, 14.22, said:

You don't get to be agnostic on one of the most fundamental questions of basic scientific reality. 'No opinion' is almost as stupid and ignorant as 'no' in this case. I mean would we hesitate to lament and scorn those who had 'no opinion' on whether the earth was flat or not? Same scenario here. You either believe the sky is blue, since it is in fact fucking blue, or there's something wrong with you whether you're fence sitting or firmly in the other camp. Cause quite frankly, there's no fucking fence to sit on. This is about as either/or as you get. If your answer is maybe, you're still dumb.

And if you think that the 35% who told some Gallup interviewer over the phone that they have "no opinion" really all have "no opinion", you are just as stupid and ignorant of science as they are.

[CiaranAnnrach]

EHK for Darwin, on May 1 2009, 14.22, said:

You don't get to be agnostic on one of the most fundamental questions of basic scientific reality.

Then why have the option in the poll?

But really, can't we just link that religion thread, or any of the religion threads to date, and save everyone a few pages of senseless argument, knowing full well this is just a repeat of history?

ETA: And the "sky is blue" analogy is really poor, because someone who is colorblind has no choice but to trust what other people say. Or, worse, if they are partially colorblind and they can't see blues, then it would appear as a completely different color. And it is by no fault of their own, either.

Edited by CiaranAnnrach, 01 May 2009 - 02:30 PM.

[El-ahrairah]

Do we really need ANOTHER evolution thread?

I think this poll might be confusing the difference between A - creationism, B - theistic evolution, and C - random evolution. Probably many of those holding opinion B (which would be the the largest group) were confused by the wording and said "no".  25% being pure creationists sounds about right.

[TheLoneliestMonk]

Quote

But really, can't we just link that religion thread, or any of the religion threads to date, and save everyone a few pages of senseless argument, knowing full well this is just a repeat of history?

only if you think the source of all skepticism about evolution.

[CiaranAnnrach]

GdMisfits, on May 1 2009, 14.30, said:

only if you think the source of all skepticism about evolution.

Well, according to EHK and others, religion is the source of all skepticism about evolution, and despite countless arguments their opinion has not been swayed any. Especially when EHK's first post is a heavy handed attack on religion.

So, yes, this is a repeat of history, and simply ending it here will save everyone quite a good deal of stress and time that would have otherwise been devoted to the same old debate.

[Blauerdrakken]

I guess That I'm on the fence.
I am not in the 61%, but could be counted as solidly anti-Darwinism only because I believe that more research is needed into how species have evolved and what catalysts drive evolution. I do not think that it is always the fittest that survive.
I am not in the other 39% either. I do believe in the Bible. I believe in the story of Creation. I do not believe that it is a literal word-for-word account of how things happened though. It is certainly one way of looking at how things came to be though, and I have no problems with a school teaching evolution in the science classes and Creationism in theology or sociology type classes. Let the children know that both theories exist. Let them take in as much knowledge as humanly possible. Then let them decide for themselves what they believe.

As for the poll, and it's implications that America is becoming less and less intelligent. I certainly did not need a poll to tell you that.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

EHK,

EHK for Darwin, on May 1 2009, 15.16, said:

For anyone who has ever doubted that Christianity is a plague, here's your evidence. Its now a pandemic and has stupified most of the population.

Right.  Given that my wife, my children, my parents, my siblings (one of whom is an evangelical Christian), my priest, and I all believe in evolution and are Christian (of various denominations) it's good to know we are now part of a "pandemic."

Edited by Ser Scot A Ellison, 01 May 2009 - 02:41 PM.

[Ken Stone]

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 14.33, said:

Well, according to EHK and others, religion is the source of all skepticism about evolution, and despite countless arguments their opinion has not been swayed any. Especially when EHK's first post is a heavy handed attack on religion.

So, yes, this is a repeat of history, and simply ending it here will save everyone quite a good deal of stress and time that would have otherwise been devoted to the same old debate.

I don't always follow evolution threads *ahem* religiously so I find this statement interesting.  Are you claiming that there are non-religious based reasons to be "skeptical" of evolution?

[TheLoneliestMonk]

Blauer,

I'm in the pastafarian camp in that if you are going to teach any "theory" that has absolutely no evidence for it and mountains of evidence against it, you should teach them all.  I bet there are some religious creation stories that are more interesting than adam and eve, more creative, or more plausable.  You can't teach one and not the others.  

Also, you talk about taking in knowledge, but i don't consider misinformation to be knowledge.

[EHK for Darwin]

Ormond, on May 1 2009, 14.26, said:

And if you think that the 35% who told some Gallup interviewer over the phone that they have "no opinion" really all have "no opinion", you are just as stupid and ignorant of science as they are.

For most of them 'No opinion' likely means 'I don't know' or 'I'm not sure', which is still fricken bad.

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 14.28, said:

Then why have the option in the poll?

They shouldn't have. That option fucks up more polls then you can count. Its not appropriate in this case. You're obviously gonna lean more one way then the other. But even if they did want a 3rd option, that option should have been 'unsure/Don't know', cause everyone has a damned opinion on it, even if its a weak one.

CiaranAnnrach, on May 1 2009, 14.33, said:

Well, according to EHK and others, religion is the source of all skepticism about evolution, and despite countless arguments their opinion has not been swayed any. Especially when EHK's first post is a heavy handed attack on religion.

Is it heavy handed when its 110% deserved and appropriate? And really, what other obstacle to a belief in evolution is there for the vast majority of the population? Religion is absolutely the culprit.

[Celtigo]

the Blauer Dragon, on May 1 2009, 15.34, said:

I guess That I'm on the fence.
I am not in the 61%, but could be counted as solidly anti-Darwinism only because I believe that more research is needed into how species have evolved and what catalysts drive evolution. I do not think that it is always the fittest that survive.
I am not in the other 39% either. I do believe in the Bible. I believe in the story of Creation. I do not believe that it is a literal word-for-word account of how things happened though. It is certainly one way of looking at how things came to be though, and I have no problems with a school teaching evolution in the science classes and Creationism in theology or sociology type classes. Let the children know that both theories exist. Let them take in as much knowledge as humanly possible. Then let them decide for themselves what they believe.

As for the poll, and it's implications that America is becoming less and less intelligent. I certainly did not need a poll to tell you that.

Creationism is not science. It does not belong in a scientific classroom. Not to mention everytime someone wants to introduce theories of creation other than those supported by falsifiable evidence, they all seem to focus on a story eerily reminiscent of the Judeo-Christian version of events. I haven't seen too many native american or hindu creation myths put forward by those who want children to be aware of all possible options.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ken,

Ken Stone, on May 1 2009, 15.38, said:

I don't always follow evolution threads *ahem* religiously so I find this statement interesting.  Are you claiming that there are non-religious based reasons to be "skeptical" of evolution?

There's always room for skepticism in science.  The presence of evolution is very well established.  The mechanism by which evolution occures, puncuated equlibrium v. gradual change (for example), is one in which there is much scientific debate.

[ljkeane]

That's just ridiculous, I'm generally not conerned by what people choose to believe about religion but rejecting evolution as 'just a theory' which has some sort of scientific evquivalence to creationism is just stupid.

I was under the impression that most major Christian denominations did not require a literal interpretation of the Bible anyway, so I would have thought being Christian and accepting evolution is not mutually exclusive?.