Americans believe in both evolution, creationism: poll
Fri Jun 8, 2:34 PM ET
Asked their views on whether human life is a result of God's creation or a product of evolution, one quarter of Americans chose both conflicting theories, a poll suggested Friday.
"All told, 25 percent say that both creationism and evolution are definitely or probably true," USA Today said.
Overall, more Americans expressed a strong belief in creationism, or the theory that God created humans in their present form at a single period in time within the last 10,000 years.
A full 66 percent said they believed in creationism, with 39 percent of those polled saying it was definitely true and 27 percent believing it was probably true.
But 53 percent said they believed in evolution, the scientific theory that humans developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. Eighteen percent said evolution was definitely true, while 35 percent said it was probably true.
The results were released in a USA Today/Gallup poll of 1,007 adults, taken between June 1-3. The margin of error was three percent.
The polarizing issue of how life came to be has worked its way into US classrooms in recent years. Some states have enacted legislation that says teachers must include critical analysis of Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory.
More recently, the question divided Republican presidential candidates who traditionally represent the Christian conservative elements of US society, with three answering in last month's debate that they do not believe in evolution.
You have to realize that most Christian "moral values" behaviour is not really about "protecting" anyone; it's about their desire to send a continual stream of messages of condemnation towards people whose existence offends them. - Darth Wong alias Mike Wong
"There is nothing wrong with being ignorant. However, there is something very wrong with not choosing to exchange ignorance for knowledge when the opportunity presents itself."
How can 1007 be used for a sample size for a country as diverse as this? This is bad statistics. Do they even provide a demographic?
STGOD: Byzantine Empire Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:How can 1007 be used for a sample size for a country as diverse as this? This is bad statistics. Do they even provide a demographic?
1007 respondants is a fine sample size. The poll itself is screwy.
Warwolves | VRWC | BotM | Writer's Guild | Pie loves Rei
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:How can 1007 be used for a sample size for a country as diverse as this? This is bad statistics. Do they even provide a demographic?
1007 respondants is a fine sample size. The poll itself is screwy.
How can it be a fine sample size? I could go pick 1007 people from each of the myriad towns and cities across the US and coincidentally pick those who believe in Creationism.
STGOD: Byzantine Empire Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:How can 1007 be used for a sample size for a country as diverse as this? This is bad statistics. Do they even provide a demographic?
1007 as sample size of proportion for a population the size of the United States is reasonably decent. Certainly enough for statistics.
Alex Moon wrote:1007 respondants is a fine sample size. The poll itself is screwy.
What about it is screwy?
"Show me an angel and I will paint you one." - Gustav Courbet
"Quetzalcoatl, plumed serpent of the Aztecs... you are a pussy." - Stephen Colbert
"Really, I'm jealous of how much smarter than me he is. I'm not an expert on anything and he's an expert on things he knows nothing about." - Me, concerning a bullshitter
It's not as if poll results like this are unprecedented. Some apologists try to paint a rosier picture by pointing to other polls where people indicate less ardour for forcing schoolteachers to teach creationism in school, but if you ask Americans what they think is actually true, it's a very small minority that puts their vote solidly with evolution.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:How can 1007 be used for a sample size for a country as diverse as this? This is bad statistics. Do they even provide a demographic?
1007 respondants is a fine sample size. The poll itself is screwy.
How can it be a fine sample size? I could go pick 1007 people from each of the myriad towns and cities across the US and coincidentally pick those who believe in Creationism.
Yes, and you could pick 1007 canditates at random and 66% could be transvestite taxi drivers called Phil, but it would be statistically unlikely.
It is entirely possible to get good conclusions from a random sample that size (ie. not all from same town, state, church, book club.)
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:How can 1007 be used for a sample size for a country as diverse as this? This is bad statistics. Do they even provide a demographic?
1007 respondants is a fine sample size. The poll itself is screwy.
How can it be a fine sample size? I could go pick 1007 people from each of the myriad towns and cities across the US and coincidentally pick those who believe in Creationism.
You don't know a fucking thing about statistics do you?
I find it interesting that they don't say what the question was. If it was as loosely defined as "Do you believe God was involved in creating life on Earth," then I'd be surprised at how low the number was. Without knowing how the poll was worded, numbers are meaningless.
Stanley Hauerwas wrote:[W]hy is it that no one is angry at the inequality of income in this country? I mean, the inequality of income is unbelievable. Unbelievable. Why isn’t that ever an issue of politics? Because you don’t live in a democracy. You live in a plutocracy. Money rules.
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:How can 1007 be used for a sample size for a country as diverse as this? This is bad statistics. Do they even provide a demographic?
Read about margins of error, and you'll see why everybody's jumping on you.
The Dark wrote:I find it interesting that they don't say what the question was. If it was as loosely defined as "Do you believe God was involved in creating life on Earth," then I'd be surprised at how low the number was. Without knowing how the poll was worded, numbers are meaningless.
The original poll results, complete with question in original form.
I love the way people in this thread are looking for excuses to dismiss the data, because it doesn't tell them what they want to hear.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
The Dark wrote:I find it interesting that they don't say what the question was. If it was as loosely defined as "Do you believe God was involved in creating life on Earth," then I'd be surprised at how low the number was. Without knowing how the poll was worded, numbers are meaningless.
The original poll results, complete with question in original form.
Thanks, Mike. It looks like it was worded fairly well. I am surprised that the number was that high, given that it was a YEC question.
Stanley Hauerwas wrote:[W]hy is it that no one is angry at the inequality of income in this country? I mean, the inequality of income is unbelievable. Unbelievable. Why isn’t that ever an issue of politics? Because you don’t live in a democracy. You live in a plutocracy. Money rules.
Darth Wong wrote:I love the way people in this thread are looking for excuses to dismiss the data, because it doesn't tell them what they want to hear.
BTW, I don't know if this was aimed at me or not, but I question any poll's data, because part of my educational training was on statistical sampling and how it gets utterly fucked up by the media. It's about at the same level for me as mecha fanboys are for you as an engineer .
Stanley Hauerwas wrote:[W]hy is it that no one is angry at the inequality of income in this country? I mean, the inequality of income is unbelievable. Unbelievable. Why isn’t that ever an issue of politics? Because you don’t live in a democracy. You live in a plutocracy. Money rules.
The fact that 25% said "both" tells me something is screwed up, that these people don't have the first clue what the question is about. While there are people out there who subscribe to theistic evolution, literal six-day creation and evolution are mutually exclusive.
Or are these morons who think evolution all happened after the flood as the ICR claims?
"everytime a person is born the Earth weighs just a little more."--DMJ on StarTrek.com
"You see now you are using your thinking and that is not a good thing!" DMJay on StarTrek.com
"Watching Sarli argue with Vympel, Stas, Schatten and the others is as bizarre as the idea of the 40-year-old Virgin telling Hugh Hefner that Hef knows nothing about pussy, and that he is the expert."--Elfdart
Darth Servo wrote:The fact that 25% said "both" tells me something is screwed up, that these people don't have the first clue what the question is about. While there are people out there who subscribe to theistic evolution, literal six-day creation and evolution are mutually exclusive.
Or are these morons who think evolution all happened after the flood as the ICR claims?
The last one still does not explain it since they specifically specified in the poll that evolution was "the idea that human beings developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life".
The best I can come up with is a bunch of people didn't want to suggest either one was false, (they don't want to offend anyone) so they picked the probably option for both.
Regardless I find the poll data quite screwey because the Creationist numbers were WAY higher than any other poll on this subject I've ever seen.
The poll data simply doesn't make much sense given in 1997 THIS EXACT SAME QUESTION AS AN OPTION was asked and only 44% of those polled picked the creationist view. http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
I simply don't buy that the views of the public have changed so dramatically the other way in so short of a period.
Omega18 wrote:The poll data simply doesn't make much sense given in 1997 THIS EXACT SAME QUESTION AS AN OPTION was asked and only 44% of those polled picked the creationist view. http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
I simply don't buy that the views of the public have changed so dramatically the other way in so short of a period.
Oh, it's been a decade. That means it has been long enough for all the 8-17 year olds from the last poll to have grown up under the care of the NCLB Bush era miseducation system. A jump like that isn't at all unreasonable considering the rapid decay of the American public educational system, although I admit I'm surprised to see it quite so quick.
But the poll looks reasonably formed with non-leading clear questions and with a satisfactory confidence interval. Unless a contrary study comes out, denying that America's getting dumber seems like grasping at straws.
"Hey, gang, we're all part of the spleen!"
-PZ Meyers
Upon further review, I can say its definitely a case of Gallop simply mostly picking a poor way to ask the poll questions.
As of 2004 only 45% of Americans picked the Creationist answer when the poll gave them almost the exact same options.
To assess public opinion on creationism, Gallup asked:
Which of the following statements comes closest to your views on the origin and development of human beings?
1) Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process,
2) Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process,
3) God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so?
Polled in November 2004, 38% of respondents chose (1), 13% chose (2), 45% chose (3), and 4% offered a different or no opinion. These results are also similar to those from previous Gallup polls, which extend back to 1982.
I suspect the issue was when talking to anyone a bunch of people are afraid, even though its merely a pollster they are talking to, that they will offend them by suggesting their beliefs are likely wrong, so they took what they though was the easy way out and picked probably for both since they didn't have to pick one of the two options. They didn't think through the fact it was not logically consistant to claim the mutually exclusive theories were both correct.
It still is somewhat of a commentary on people being stupid, but not really on that many people actually believing in creationism.
Eris wrote:
Oh, it's been a decade. That means it has been long enough for all the 8-17 year olds from the last poll to have grown up under the care of the NCLB Bush era miseducation system. A jump like that isn't at all unreasonable considering the rapid decay of the American public educational system, although I admit I'm surprised to see it quite so quick.
But the poll looks reasonably formed with non-leading clear questions and with a satisfactory confidence interval. Unless a contrary study comes out, denying that America's getting dumber seems like grasping at straws.
As noted, given a jump of 21% would actually have to occur in 3 years, the primary conclusion has to be this new poll was simply badly screwed up and didn't consider how people are likely to answer such a contraversial question when talking to other people.
Dude, it's been more than a decade, and the issue really came to light in the 2000 election. It's possible that in their evangelical fervor, fundamentalists began to step up the, well, evangelizing in an effort to mobilize politically.
"If one needed proof that a guitar was more than wood and string, that a song was more than notes and words, and that a man could be more than a name and a few faded pictures, then Robert Johnson’s recordings were all one could ask for."
wolveraptor wrote:Dude, it's been more than a decade, and the issue really came to light in the 2000 election. It's possible that in their evangelical fervor, fundamentalists began to step up the, well, evangelizing in an effort to mobilize politically.
Uh, actually it would be 3 years and a 21% change in those 3 years. Basically this is a commentary on how people try to avoid offending anyone if they can avoid it, not really on their beliefs.
wolveraptor wrote:Dude, it's been more than a decade, and the issue really came to light in the 2000 election. It's possible that in their evangelical fervor, fundamentalists began to step up the, well, evangelizing in an effort to mobilize politically.
Uh, actually it would be 3 years and a 21% change in those 3 years. Basically this is a commentary on how people try to avoid offending anyone if they can avoid it, not really on their beliefs.
Sorry, I only saw your initial post, which cited a 1997 poll. I was slow in typing.
Isn't 66% down a little bit? I seem to recall it being an even larger super majority last time. Like 75% or 80%.
The Gentleman from Texas abstains. Discourteously.
PRFYNAFBTFC-Vice Admiral: MFS Masturbating Walrus :: Omine subtilite Odobenus rosmarus masturbari Soy un perdedor.
"WHO POOPED IN A NORMAL ROOM?!"-Commander William T. Riker
.
