News Evolution Less Accepted in U.S. Than Other Western Countries, Study Finds

[scott1]

People in the United States are much less likely to accept Darwin's idea that humans and apes share a common ancestor than adults in other Western nations, a number of surveys show.

A new study of those surveys suggests that the main reason for this lies in a unique confluence of religion, politics, and the public understanding of biological science in the United States.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060810-evolution.html"

 

[pcorbett]

So I guess there's no downside to rejecting the notion that human beings share common ancestors with other species.

 

[Gokul43201]

So I guess there's no downside to rejecting the notion that human beings share common ancestors with other species.

Based on what study?

 

[Evo]

So I guess there's no downside to rejecting the notion that human beings share common ancestors with other species.

Yeah, like there is no downside to rejecting the fact that the Earth is round or truth in general. No, no downside at all to being abysmally stupid.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Hardly a shock since something like 96% of US citizens are religous, might as well of had a pole asking if the US was a country in North America? Would of been more revealing, and anyone who got it wrong could be weeded out of the population by "natural" selection i.e. thrown to the lions.

 

[neurocomp2003]

a better question would have been where are Canada and mexico relative to US. or what are the 12-13 provinces of Canada. Love those types of questions on jeopardy

 

[George Jones]

or what are the 12-13 provinces of Canada.

How many provinces?!

 

[jtbell]

How many provinces?!

I count either 10 or 13, depending on whether you include the territories:

Newfoundland (& Labrador)
Nova Scotia
PEI
New Brunswick
Quebec
Ontario
Manitoba
Saskatchewan
Alberta
British Columbia
NW Territory
Yukon Territory
Nunavut (territory)

Aside: Does your browser support the Inuktitut language?

http://www.gov.nu.ca/inuktitut/

It works for me in Foxfire 1.5.0.2 (MacOS).

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Wrong Quebec isn't part of Canada

 

[Astronuc]

Wrong Quebec isn't part of Canada

Well at least they (or some) try not to be.

 

[Smurf]

Hardly a shock since something like 96% of US citizens are religous, might as well of had a pole asking if the US was a country in North America? Would of been more revealing, and anyone who got it wrong could be weeded out of the population by "natural" selection i.e. thrown to the lions.

Lots of countries are more religious than the US. I don't think that alone means much at all.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Lots of countries are more religious than the US. I don't think that alone means much at all.

Not among the "other western nations" that were considered in the study. The US is WAY more religious than the countries of Western Europe. This includes famous Catholic countries like Ireland, Poland, and even Italy.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Not among the "other western nations" that were considered in the study. The US is WAY more religious than the countries of Western Europe. This includes famous Catholic countries like Ireland, Poland, and even Italy.

And much of it is not just any religion, it's fundamentalism.

I've spent a lot of time in the South in recent years: Scary stuff!

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Lots of countries are more religious than the US. I don't think that alone means much at all.

Well in order to prove this assumption you would have to show that countries that are secular have no difference in their belief or disbelief in creationism between more religous countries, and frankly It would take a lot of internet searching, I'm not sure you'd find much because the US is the only country that cares enough about the issue to produce figures about this topic, and that I'd say is precisely because of fundementalist lobbyists.

However what I can say is that the loudest voices on the creationism debate are US citizens and they are fundementalist in the main. So this deep rooted religous backbone to the US I would say is very relevant. Unless you can show me why religion isn't an important factor in deciding whether you believe in Evolution or something else, considering the only other theories come from religion; Creationism, ID, Budhism and Hinduism, and Vodon and Celtic mysticism(or druidism) Etc, etc, etc. all have creation myths.

AAMOI I wonder what Muslims believe?

 

[Bystander]

'Tain't religion --- it's "self-esteem" and "outcome based education."

 

[ptabor]

I've spoken to many so called bible thumpers, who accept the bible as the literal truth of creation.

I think the reason they accept this is that it is static - the ideas of science are constantly in revision - as if that's a BAD thing.

I think the problem has multiple roots. The first being tradition. Many people in this country are religious, and as children don't want to be ostracized from their social group so they pile in rank and file to the creationism camp.

Later on in life they are failed by the public school system that does not require science education in the later years of high school. Evidence is evidence in so far as it does not contradict the all mighty book of genesis.

This lack of education (specifically on the fundamentals of the scientific method) leads students to accept all sorts of straw man arguments about evolution (ie we evolved from apes) to the point where any rational person would have to reject "evolution" (read: straw man arguments not the actual theory).

As an aside - off topic - students in america are also not capable of digesting relatively complex economics. This is why we fall prey to the demogoguery of "tax the big oil companies! they make too much money!". Take 10 high school graduates and ask them the difference between profit and profit margin and I'm willing to bet 10 of them cannot.

 

[Bystander]

Hardly a shock since something like 96% of US citizens are religous, might as well of had a pole asking if the US was a country in North America? Would of been more revealing, and anyone who got it wrong could be weeded out of the population by "natural" selection i.e. thrown to the lions.

http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=237

______________________________________________________________

The christian fundamentalists here seem to outdo even the Islamic ones at times-although they have not resorted to detonations---yet.

Few abortion clinics, might throw Ok. C. into the category, few other incidents that are a little tough to account for motive-wise --- killing each other over cartoons in Danish newspapers? No. Dancing in the streets over the '04 Xmas quake & tsunami? No. Wearing ski masks, kidnapping, extortion, pushing people in wheel chairs overboard from cruise ships? No.

'Nuff with the off-topic hijack attempt --- 20-30% of the population attends church regularly (whatever that means), and what fraction are "fundamentalist" to the point of literal interpretation of Genesis --- we'll go with half (fewer than 10% if I've read religious demographics correctly), and that accounts for the ignorance of 15% of the total population. Still got to come up with another 35% to match the NG figure --- might be a "geriatric" pop. fraction in there (age and impending mortality affect some peoples' views), prison evangelism --- doubt it's any more effective than other rehabilitations --- and ain't going to pick up more than tenths of a percent, what else? Public schools: pass 'em on; less is more; whole language; outcome based; respect other peoples' opinions (even when they're totally wrong); never trust your own judgment, but find an "authority" to help you make decisions; group-think; the whole, "touchy-feely," socially engineered nine yards.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

By religous I mean believe in God. I supose I should of made that clear. For example My mother is deeply religous but has never attended church other than for marriages, christenings etc. Interesting we have a high proportion of liars here in the UK, thanks for the info

On topic it does throw up the question of are these people simply trying to fit in or do they really disbelieve Evolution? Be fair at least Ptabor has remained on topic and posed a very interesting question, which I have gratuitously almost plageurised.

 

[Bystander]

(snip)On topic it does throw up the question of are these people simply trying to fit in or do they really disbelieve Evolution?(snip)

$64k question. Near's I can tell, the poll gave three options, "believe, disbelieve, and don't know;" run three no-name candidates for some insignificant public office in this country, and you'll get the same "tri-"furcated vote breakdown --- people pick one answer at random --- the "dunnos" (ca. 20%) times 3 is my estimate of "random" responses; means true "believers" are 28 - 20, or 8%, true "disbelievers" are 52 - 20, or 32% --- still scary, but a little closer to church membership and attendance. Other national results? How many people are answering to "go along with the crowd," official positions, because they feel a certain answer is expected? Tough poll to interpret.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Mmm interesting do they give a +- statistical error value? I know they do that with political poles, I believe it's 2.5%.

 

[Anttech]

Not among the "other western nations" that were considered in the study. The US is WAY more religious than the countries of Western Europe. This includes famous Catholic countries like Ireland, Poland, and even Italy.

Well Greece (If you classify Greece as 'western') is more religious and also Cyprus than the states. Greece is the most religious country in Europe, it is completely intertwined into the culture, for millennia.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Actualy what I meant to say was it's 2.5% margin of error for number of votes, actually it works out more like a figure of +-5% of totals. If they know the poles are going to be off by 20% it's hard to see why they'd bother.

Now all we need to know is how many people in Greece disbelieve evolution? Any thoughts...

 

[Anttech]

Some but its not the norm, from my personal experience. They are in general well educated. To a degree that it is a problem, there are to many Degree holders for jobs positions in Greece now.

 

[Gokul43201]

$64k question. Near's I can tell, the poll gave three options, "believe, disbelieve, and don't know;" run three no-name candidates for some insignificant public office in this country, and you'll get the same "tri-"furcated vote breakdown --- people pick one answer at random --- the "dunnos" (ca. 20%) times 3 is my estimate of "random" responses; means true "believers" are 28 - 20, or 8%, true "disbelievers" are 52 - 20, or 32% --- still scary, but a little closer to church membership and attendance. Other national results? How many people are answering to "go along with the crowd," official positions, because they feel a certain answer is expected? Tough poll to interpret.

About a year or longer ago I posted the results of a poll by Zogby (I think) that asked Americans if they believed in things like (i) common ancestry from Adam and Eve, (ii) immaculate conception, (iii) heaven and hell, etc. I think I remember a surprisingly large percentage (closer to 50% than to 25%, I think) of respondents saying they believed all these things to be true. Can't seem to find that thread anymore!

Couldn't find what I was looking for but ended up finding original sources for the poll mentioned in this thread (and another similar one):

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=719

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=581

From the Harris poll:

A majority of U.S. adults (54%) do not think human beings developed from earlier species, up from 46 percent in 1994.

Bingo! Found the other poll I was talking about - it was done by Harris.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=112

Some results from that poll:

[b]TABLE 1

BELIEF IN GOD, AND OTHER SUPERNATURAL FORCES, PLACES AND EVENTS[/b]

"I will read you a list of things some people believe in. 
Please say for each one if you believe in it, or not."

                                   [b]ALL ADULTS(%)[/b]

God                                     94

Heaven                                  89

The resurrection of Christ              86

The Virgin birth (Jesus born of Mary)   82

The devil                               72

Hell                                    73

 

[Astronuc]

The christian fundamentalists here seem to outdo even the Islamic ones at times-although they have not resorted to detonations---yet.

Timothy McVeigh was influenced by some so-called fundamentalist or 'apocalyptic' groups, or possibly some 'Christian Patriot' groups, a term which may apply to some anti-government or supremacist groups. McVeigh's action (bombing the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing) was in part his retaliation for the 'Waco' incident in which followers of David Koresh and Koresh himself died in a fire after a standoff with US government law enforcement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Koresh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branch_Davidians

 

[George Jones]

About a year or longer ago I posted the results of a poll by Zogby (I think) that asked Americans if they believed in things like (i) common ancestry from Adam and Eve,

Reminds me of the start of Martin Chuzzlewit by Charles Dickens.

"As no lady or gentleman, with any claims to polite breeding, can possibly sympathize with the Chuzzlewit Family without being first assured of the extreme antiquity of the race, it is a great satisfaction to know that it undoubtedly descended in a direct line from Adam and Eve"

 

[George Jones]

I count either 10 or 13, depending on whether you include the territories:

The territories are not provinces; provinces and territoies are subject to different rules. I think something similar happens in the U.S. For example, the U.S. Virgin Islands is not subject to NAFTA, so when I worked there, I needed an H-1B visa, but when I worked in West Virginia, I needed only TN status, since, as a state, West Virginia is subject to NAFTA.

 

[DaveC426913]

The territories are not provinces; provinces and territoies are subject to different rules.

Yeah, Canadians know that. They also know that they can't think of a single practical distinction between the two, and treat them as synonymous in all situations except trivia questions.

 

[JasonRox]

About a year or longer ago I posted the results of a poll by Zogby (I think) that asked Americans if they believed in things like (i) common ancestry from Adam and Eve, (ii) immaculate conception, (iii) heaven and hell, etc. I think I remember a surprisingly large percentage (closer to 50% than to 25%, I think) of respondents saying they believed all these things to be true. Can't seem to find that thread anymore!

Couldn't find what I was looking for but ended up finding original sources for the poll mentioned in this thread (and another similar one):

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=719

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=581

From the Harris poll:


Bingo! Found the other poll I was talking about - it was done by Harris.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=112

Some results from that poll:

[b]TABLE 1

BELIEF IN GOD, AND OTHER SUPERNATURAL FORCES, PLACES AND EVENTS[/b]

"I will read you a list of things some people believe in. 
Please say for each one if you believe in it, or not."

                                   [b]ALL ADULTS(%)[/b]

God                                     94

Heaven                                  89

The resurrection of Christ              86

The Virgin birth (Jesus born of Mary)   82

The devil                               72

Hell                                    73

Are you serious?!

I don't know whether or not I believe in God or not. It makes no sense to me to argue about it or even ponder about it. Whatever conclusion you come up with will ultimately make no logical sense.

I don't believe in Heaven though. I'm so shocked at how 89% of people can believe in Heaven. That's just absurd.

I'm not surprised though considering the fact that most Americans want instant gratification and this life of materialism (American dream). What's even more sad that most people think they are good enough to go to Heaven, which I totally disagree. I have met very few people that I think would qualify for Heaven if it existed. A lot has to do with the fact that these people do things regardless of the existence of Heaven.

Anyways, I'd like to say more, but I don't want to rant on.

 

[DaveC426913]

I'm so shocked at how 89% of people can believe in Heaven. That's just absurd.

I'm not surprised though considering the fact that most Americans want instant gratification and this life of materialism (American dream).

Not to rain on your shock but I'm pretty sure the "belief in Heaven" was around a year or three before " the American Dream" came along.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Not to rain on your shock but I'm pretty sure the widespread "belief in Heaven" predates " the American Dream" by a year or three.

In a general way, but the history of religion is non trivial. The "Great Awakening" with its implied promise of easy access to heaven (contra the Catholics, Calvinists, and others) only occurred after the American Revolution.

 

[DaveC426913]

How dare you misquote me.

 

[Astronuc]

Joseph Tracy, the minister and historian who gave this religious phemonenon its name in his influential (and still, to many, definitive) 1842 book The Great Awakening, saw the First Great Awakening as a precursor to the War of Independence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Awakening#Influence_on_American_political_life On the other hand, I strongly doubt the first Great Awaking was a strong influence on Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Jay, and many others who were inspired to take up the Revolution against the King of England.

The first Great Awakening was apparently established in 1740, and followed the activities of Jonathan Edwards from 1731-1739.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Great_Awakening
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Edwards_(theologian)

Most historians agree that the revolutionary era began in 1763,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution

However, while it would appear that this thread has drifted off course from the OP, which was concerned with the fact that evolution is less accepted in America, the rejection of evolution by many in America is the result of the evolution of religious belief that precludes acceptance of evolution.

 

[Kalimaa23]

Turn out they just did the same poll over here in a popular radio show

What do you think about evolution?

86% Of course I believe in evolution, it seems to most logical explanation
06% It's a possibility, but I'd rather believe that God created us
08% I don't buy it, I think it went differently.

People were shocked (and I as well) that SO FEW people over here think evolution is correct!

 

[Rach3]

Mmm interesting do they give a +- statistical error value? I know they do that with political poles[/color], I believe it's 2.5%.

Hey, can't a Pole be political without being accused of error?

 

[Tzemach]

Evolution and the Biblical concept of creation are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Those who are resistant to the possibility of Biblical accuracy currently take heart from the first chapter of Genesis. The world was not created in six days as the Bible says. The milestones of the six days of creation are enumerated day by day, but the Sun does not appear until day four. If this is the case how did they measure the days before the sun was created, surely we can’t be expected to believe that days were measured in twenty-four hour blocks in anticipation of the creation of the Earth. Science tells us that the universe was created (the big bang happened) about fifteen billion years ago and our Sun was formed about five billion years ago. The Sun has therefore only existed for the last third of the life of the universe, as the Bible says the Sun was created on day four of the six days it appears that science and the Bible are in concurrence, our solar system is one-third the age of the universe.

The main area of dispute between supporters of the Bible and those that are opposed to Bible teaching is in the area of evolution. Kabbalists and Bible students are well aware that the Bible does in fact allude to evolution, but as the method of creation is subordinate to the reason for creation (in the Bible view) only half a dozen verses (Genesis 20-26) have been devoted to four billion years of natural adaptation. The Bible lists the order of creation from aquatic creatures to land animals, mammals and eventually humans, which is the same order that we have established from the fossil record.

The fossil record does provide some clues that evolution may have had some help along the way. In the Cambrian period 550 million years ago we have what is known as the “Cambrian explosion ” of animal life, when with no indication in the previous fossil record countless new species simply appeared. The Bible also refers to dinosaurs, although because there were a number of Bible translations before dinosaurs had been discovered nobody knew what the Bible was talking about. In Genesis 1:21 the only animals to whom a size is attributed are the “big taninim” a term which has been translated at different times as whales, crocodiles and even dragons. The term “taninim” is the plural of the noun “tanin” which also appears in Exodus, when Moses staff turns into a “nachash” (snake) it is also referred to as a “tanin” (reptile). So that when Genesis 1:21 says that God created the “big reptiles”, it indicates that the Bible knew about dinosaurs three and a half thousand years before science.

 

[Astronuc]

So that when Genesis 1:21 says that God created the “big reptiles”, it indicates that the Bible knew about dinosaurs three and a half thousand years before science.

Not quite. It means that the people who wrote the Tanach (or Chumash) referenced the reptiles with which they were familiar, not dinosaurs.

The Bible also refers to dinosaurs, . . .

This is an unsubstantiated claim. It would correct to say that some people choose to believe that the Bible refers to dinosaurs.

Please read the guidelines with respect to speculative claims.

 

[Gokul43201]

Evolution and the Biblical concept of creation are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Those who are resistant to the possibility of Biblical accuracy currently take heart from the first chapter of Genesis. The world was not created in six days as the Bible says. The milestones of the six days of creation are enumerated day by day, but the Sun does not appear until day four. If this is the case how did they measure the days before the sun was created, surely we can’t be expected to believe that days were measured in twenty-four hour blocks in anticipation of the creation of the Earth.

Well, according to your Genesis, day and night were created before the Sun and Moon! Heck, the Earth was created before the Sun! Don't come to me and ask me what sense there is in that, but apparently there was a way to count days before the Sun was created, just as there was a way to have day and night on Earth with no Sun in the sky.

 

[George Jones]

Well, according to your Genesis, day and night were created before the Sun and Moon! Heck, the Earth was created before the Sun! Don't come to me and ask me what sense there is in that, but apparently there was a way to count days before the Sun was created, just as there was a way to have day and night on Earth with no Sun in the sky.

Well, someone (not necessarily me) might argue that this is just a concrete way of saying that time existed before the Sun and the moon.

When things are open to interpretation, any meaning is possible, which makes fact-based discussion difficult.

 

[Gokul43201]

When things are open to interpretation, any meaning is possible, which makes fact-based discussion difficult.

And when interpretation moulds itself to convenience (whales become dinosaurs, the Earth becomes the universe, day/night become metaphorical for time) and consistency goes out the door (sticking to that interpretation of the day, birds should have appeared on Earth a couple of billion years before man), any kind of discussion becomes difficult.

 

[loseyourname]

Well Greece (If you classify Greece as 'western') is more religious and also Cyprus than the states. Greece is the most religious country in Europe, it is completely intertwined into the culture, for millennia.

Armenia, too, if that's to be considered western. Never been to either country and don't know many Greeks, but I've spent enough time in the Armenian neighborhoods in Los Angeles and befriended enough immigrants to know that that country is extremely religious and their church constitutes either the single most or second most (after language) important foundation of the entire cultural identity.

 

[Yonoz]

Has anyone heard about the http://www.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Health/health19.htm" ? There's not much reference to it on the web.

In a provocative experiment with patients suffering from an unusual form of epilepsy, researchers at the UC-San Diego brain and perception laboratory determined that the parts of the brain's temporal lobe -- which the scientists quickly dubbed the "God module" -- may affect how intensely a person responds to religious beliefs.

People suffering from this type of seizure have long reported intense mystical and religious experiences as part of their attacks but also are unusually preoccupied with mystical thoughts between seizures.

That led this team to use these patients as a way of investigating the relationship between the physical structure of the brain and spiritual experiences.

In a carefully designed experiment, the researchers determined that one effect of the patients' seizures was to strengthen their brain's involuntary response to religious words, leading the scientists to suggest a portion of the brain is naturally attuned to ideas about a supreme being.

EDIT: It's a bit philosophical, and will obviously do little to convince someone who believes the existence of god, but it will surely feel like a small victory when science will be able to explain the belief in god as a biological/evolutionary trait. It's probable that a society in which individuals have a genetic predisposition to act ethically by some primitive sense of an omnipotent supreme judge will outcompete a rival society with unchecked aggression and power struggles. It's just a theory.

Also, check out the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_syndrome" .

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Hey, can't a Pole be political without being accused of error?

No, because people lie, change their minds at the last minute or just don't vote at all. This upsets the accuracy of the vote, in essence you always have to allow for human nature, the value of this in a political pole is about +-5%

So don't count on a win if it's a 35% to 39% lead.

 

[Yonoz]

No, because people lie, change their minds at the last minute or just don't vote at all. This upsets the accuracy of the vote, in essence you always have to allow for human nature, the value of this in a political pole is about 5%

I think she was referring to your misspelling of poll.

 

[Rach3]

I think she was referring to your misspelling of poll.

He!

 

[Yonoz]

He!

Huh, sorry. Thought Rach stood for Rachel.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I think she was referring to your misspelling of poll.

Ack that's like the third time this week someone's corrected my spelling, are you just picking on me for humour or is this just general pedantry?

I have no sense of humour when it comes to grammar/spelling junkies, be warned

If I don't know how to spell pole it isn't exactly going to come acrosss, it's like trying to explain a mistake in English to someone who doesn't speak the language see.