Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

In America, 46% of People Hold a Creationist View of Human Origins

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the you-ess-ay!-you-ess-ay! dept.

Education 1359

An anonymous reader writes "The latest Gallup poll is out, and it finds that 46% of Americans hold the view that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years. According to Gallup, the percentage who hold this view has remained unchanged since 1982, when they first started asking the question. Roughly 33% of Americans believe in divinely guided evolution, and 15% believe that humans evolved without any supernatural help."

cancel ×

1359 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Really? (4, Interesting)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183563)

Thereâ(TM)s a big difference between what people tell pollsters because they think thatâ(TM)s what they *should* say, verses what they actually do or believe. For example most people say they go to church on a regular basis, yet other polls say church attendance is down, and the truth is that most people sleep in on Sunday. Most Americans say they are Christians because they think itâ(TM)s the âoerightâ thing to say, but most probably canâ(TM)t accurately quote a single significant paragraph of the Bible, new or old, nor articulate any significant bible theory. The truth is that most people are basically agnostic.

Re:Really? (4, Insightful)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183625)

Kinda sounds like No-True-Scotsman logic to me.

Re:Really? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183749)

"Kinda sounds like No-True-Scotsman logic to me."

Not quite. Religions have doctrines that you follow or you only 'religious' in name only. In fact many holy texts make it pretty obvious who is and isn't part of their religion with rules and general guidelines for 'fake/false' believers, etc. Go read the new testament if you doubt this.

Re:Really? (5, Insightful)

Stellian (673475) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183951)

Religions have doctrines that you follow or you only 'religious' in name only.

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn if these people firmly believe life on earth is less than 10.000 years old, or they are just saying that because they heard it in bible class. The fact is these morons vote, and they are ruining things for the rest of us.

Percentage of error greatly understated. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183975)

No, it means the +/- 4% poll error is grossly understated. Look, we all know that the selection methodology used to generate the sample size leads to that sort of minimum percentage error. What people don't talk about is what the OP is - the difference between:
a) what people say they do and what they actually do.
b) whether people answer with the dogma of their faith vs. what they actually believe.

Throw in things such as:
a) weak wording in the questions conflating or confusing two ideas: "God created human beings pretty much in their present form within the last 1,000 years or so" or "most closely represents your beliefs".
b) problems with interviewees not understanding the question or not giving a shit
c) inability in the survey to record whether the interviewee has been educated in evolution or basic science classes, let alone not failing them
d) strange slant towards Christianity

And there is no where near a 95% confidence the margin of error is 4% or less.

But the hokey bullshit talking about the results of the survey will continue and well end up with another 2000+ post thread with 90% "LOL, thems are idiots" comments, just like what happened earlier in the week.

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183653)

You're confused, the religion in which you need to memorize words is Islam. In Christianity there are so many different translations that it's useless to memorize, because in the time it takes you to recite a paragraph a new translation's been published and your effort is worthless.

Re:Really? (3, Informative)

Grygus (1143095) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183825)

That is complete nonsense. Christians are expected to memorize several passages word-for-word, and though you are correct that the specific set and wording passages varies by denomination, they all have their set. In denominations with Confirmation, members are expected to basically memorize an entire catechism. Things like The Lord's Prayer are universally expected. If you attend church regularly, you will end up memorizing hymns, the more ritualistic parts such as the blessing and benediction, and oft-cited passages in sermons (which again may vary by church or pastor/priest, but they all have favorites.)

I do not know of any church that adopts new translations as they release; the vast majority of Christian churches adopt one translation and stick with it for years and years.

homework... (4, Funny)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183925)

More telling, religions don't deal with formal proofs and require that you show your work.

Re:Really? (5, Insightful)

Mr Thinly Sliced (73041) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183685)

There's a big difference between what people tell pollsters because they think that's what they *should* say, verses what they actually do or believe

Even assuming what you say is true, it's still a pretty strong reflection on how screwed up your society is that people are coerced into espousing a particular worldview due to pressure.

Land of the free indeed.....

Re:Really? (5, Interesting)

mcmonkey (96054) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183745)

You're not making me feel better. I don't know if there is a big difference between 'most people don't believe in evolution' and 'most people think they should say they don't believe in evolution.'

Actually, I'd say the later is worse. Whether you think we're here as a result of evolution or creation, you're not going anywhere without thinking for yourself. Someone who examines the evidence and concludes creation is most probable is (IMNSHO) mistaken, but can be reasoned with. Someone who believes in evolution just because that's what they've been told is lost.

Re:Really? (5, Funny)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183809)

My complaint is there there's never a place on the forms to mark that I believe in the theory that life started when Neil deGrasse Tyson traveled back in time to ejaculate into the primordial ooze.

Re:Really? (0)

RudySolis (1438319) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183833)

The truth is that most people are basically agnostic.

Thanks for your opinion and obvious superior knowledge of what people think and say. Why have polls? They should just ask you! You could be like an 'Oracle'... except your name would be "Frosty Piss".

(suitable)

Re:Really? (2)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183895)

yet other polls say church attendance is down,

Does iChurch count?

Re:Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183999)

Surveys and interviews show patterns of what people think people should think, or what they'd like others to believe about themselves, even if it's not 100% true. That's just how it is. They're by no means fool-proof and in this situation they're just useful to get a broad view of a general trend which is pretty much what the article is stating.

Stats 101 for anyone who has gone to college.

Re:Really? (1)

aoeusnth (101740) | more than 2 years ago | (#40184033)

Most Americans say they are Christians because they think itâ(TM)s the âoerightâ thing to say.... The truth is that most people are basically agnostic.

Americans believe that saying they're Christian is the right thing to say? In this day and age? Wow.

I think most people are in fact not agnostic at all. It's actually quite an uncomfortable admission to say you don't know the truth either way, that in fact it may be unknowable. That's what pushes people into religion or science, after all....

Until you can prove them wrong (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183585)

you need to shut-up and quit mocking them. The idea of a divine creator is no sillier than the idea of creation from nothing.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (5, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183623)

Sure it is.

Who created the devine creator?

In fact the idea of a devine creator is 2x as silly, since it requires that the devine creator was created and from nothing.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183671)

Alan Devine was created by his parents.

Ah, Recursionism (5, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183705)

A devoted Recursionist, I see

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (3, Insightful)

gameboyhippo (827141) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183853)

A man was eating pizza one day when suddenly a guy eating a double cheeseburger approaches him and says, "You know eating pizza will make you fat."

You say that it is silly to believe in an uncreated creator while believing in an uncreated universe/multiverse/etc...

Not that it matters, but your logic is flawed anyway. The definition of a divine creator is an entity that just is and was never created. Since such a creator would have created even time itself, it is nonsensical to ask who created the creator since that would imply that time existed before creation.

In any case, it doesn't matter if you're a theist or atheist; at some point you have to believe in the absurd notion that everything came from an uncreated something.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (4, Funny)

HuguesT (84078) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183997)

In the beginning was very low entropy and a lot of energy. Then it went downhill from there.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (2, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183993)

since it requires that the devine creator was created and from nothing.

Not really. Something "outside the universe" cannot be assumed to exist as what we know as "matter" or "energy", nor would it be subject to what we know as "time".

To argue that it would need to be "created from nothing" itself is making all sorts of assumptions.

Its absurd as a Princess Peach saying the Mushroom Kingdom universe must have been spontaneously created from nothing because its 2x as silly to think there is some sort of creator.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40184021)

Sure it is.

Who created the devine creator?

In fact the idea of a devine creator is 2x as silly, since it requires that the devine creator was created and from nothing.

Ah, excuse me, but what in the hell are you doing bringing logic into a discussion about religion?

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (2)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183645)

Yes. it really is far sillier.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (5, Interesting)

doconnor (134648) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183657)

There is no evidence to support the idea of a divine creator. There is a growing body [amazon.ca] of evidence that the Universe could have been created from nothing (aka a quantum vacuum).

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (2)

darniil (793468) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183775)

The nothing that can be defined (as a quantum vacuum) is not the true nothing.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183909)

so you're saying "this is not the nothing that i'm looking for?"

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183841)

What if the universe always existed for eternity? Sure, in our little flash in a pan lives we can't comprehend it since everything we experience has a beginning and end, especially ourselves, but that doesn't mean it can't be. If I had to bet I would just say the universe was always there and always will be there and all these scientists trying to come up with wacky scientific creation theories still have religious residue warping their minds.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183845)

So the universe started as a quantum vacuum.

If that's the case, prove it's not a divinely created quantum vacuum.

If I'm wrong, I loose nothing. If I'm right, you lose everything.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (4, Insightful)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 2 years ago | (#40184035)

If I'm wrong, I loose nothing. If I'm right, you lose everything.

So, you believe in God "just in case"? At least have a backbone about it, that's the worst reason you can have. At least those with *faith* are at about a level 5 of human motivation ("finding a higher purpose"), you haven't even climbed past level 1 ("survival").

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183693)

Of course it is. One idea can, and is being, modeled, simulated, and tested by some of the most complex devices ever created. The other was written in a book.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (5, Interesting)

swished7 (670525) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183767)

The idea of a divine creator is no sillier than the idea of creation from nothing.

I'm tempted to agree with that statement. The problem I have with religious belief systems is when questioning the system is forbidden. A (good) scientist is willing to change his theory to suit his observations. Non-religious types "mock" those who are so attached to what they've been told to believe they can't accept new information.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (2)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183779)

Evolution is not about the origin of matter. Further, we know the process of evolution exists, observed it (in part), and know how it works. We don't know a (different) process that makes creators out of nothing (or simpler stuff).

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (5, Interesting)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183821)

A single photon with a frequency of 10^98Hz has enough energy to create all the matter in the universe.

Photons are popping in and out of the quantum soup all the time.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183843)

The idea of a divine creator is no sillier than the idea of creation from nothing.

Both ideas are silly. Life do not come from nothing, it comes from combinations of elements that compose the universe. There is nothing magic at work, only chemistry.

Re:Until you can prove them wrong (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183931)

Your logic is flawed, because the onus is not on science to prove them wrong; the burden of proof is upon the creationists to show evidence supporting their position. Science needs only present evidence that its side is right, which is it doing. Your holding an irrational belief does not create obligation for others.

Who answers these polls? (4, Interesting)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183593)

Who actually answers these polls?
I bet even in 1982 it was mostly old people.

Re:Who answers these polls? (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183647)

That's an interesting take on it. I mean seriously, who in the hell has the time these days to respond to a Q and A phone call? Not me. I hate answering my phone as it is let alone making calls.

Re:Who answers these polls? (5, Informative)

skovnymfe (1671822) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183663)

Results are based on telephone interviews conducted May 3-6, 2012 with a random sample of –1,024—adults, aged 18+, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

It's the very first line of the report. http://www.gallup.com/file/poll/155006/Creationism_120601.pdf [gallup.com]

Re:Who answers these polls? (5, Insightful)

Blahah (1444607) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183765)

That doesn't tell you much about the demographics involved.

Those 1,024 adults could have been somewhat self-selected. What kind of person answers the telephone without first confirming who the call is from, then proceeds to answer a bunch of inane questions? A person stupid enough to believe in creationism, that's who.

Re:Who answers these polls? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183913)

There are several techniques to validate such polls. It's amazing how accurate they can be.

Re:Who answers these polls? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183815)

Any poll conducted by telephone is inherently biased. Assuming they're calling (predominantly? only?) land-line phones, this method is becoming even more biased over time.

Re:Who answers these polls? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183883)

1000 adults? that's it? and from that you can decide what 46% of ALL AMERICANS believe?

stupid polls. stupid stupid polls.

Re:Who answers these polls? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183949)

You realize that's also how science works, right?

Re:Who answers these polls? (3, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183939)

Which means either old people or folks without jobs, but I repeat myself. Any poll like this is not much better than a slashdot poll, about the same level of self selection.

If they are calling landlines, it is pretty much just the elderly.

Re:Who answers these polls? (1)

oxdas (2447598) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183991)

I think their critique was more that their methodology is a bit dubious because their respondents are largely self-selecting. The study completely ignores any people who choose not to answer random calls or not participate in phone surveys. If this is a growing demographic, then the respondents would increasingly represent less of the population.

in other words, 46% of americans are dumb (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183595)

in other words, 46% of americans are dumb

Not necessarily (2, Interesting)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183731)

Not necessarily. I don't think Netanyahu, Hitler, the Pope, Negroes, Presbyterians, Gays, or Albanians are/were dumb either, in an intelligence sense.

They may be ignorant or have a lower rate in tests due to social reasons, but that is not necessarily the same as dumb, as in low intelligence. Uneducated may be cause. BTW, the Pope and Netanyahu are not uneducated, so, they must be stupid, or dumb as you put it.

Re:in other words, 46% of americans are dumb (5, Insightful)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183735)

They are not dumb. They are victims of an virulently infectious and devastating mental illness (faith). They can't really help it and they should not be insulted for it any more than a kid with polio should be insulted about being in a wheel chair.

Re:in other words, 46% of americans are dumb (1, Troll)

localman57 (1340533) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183741)

in other words, 46% of americans are dumb

And, apparently, 15% of the people think so. Damn, we put a lot of effort into an argument whose result, whatever it may be, has so little practical applicaiton.

Re:in other words, 46% of americans are dumb (5, Insightful)

hey! (33014) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183871)

in other words, 46% of americans are dumb

If by "dumb" you mean "below median intelligence", that's approximately correct.

Re:in other words, 46% of americans are dumb (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40184005)

This is correct and true, not only for the US, but the entire human population. Also, most people have a greater-than-average number of legs.

Re:in other words, 46% of americans are dumb (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183873)

Why do you bigots on here constantly with your small minds pick on creationists and believe in global warming?

Some have a more nuanced view (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183597)

It doesn't have to be either "take the Bible literally" or "science and evolution".

Some are perfectly fine with believing the science and the process of evolution, but also see religion as a framework of stories. Someone once said, "The Bible says what God did; science explains how He did it."

Re:Some have a more nuanced view (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183737)

My belief, but the article shows that the poll explicitly asked in the last 10k years, and there was another response for God had a hand in the science and that scored lower.

Re:Some have a more nuanced view (2)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183897)

Yes, and if you read the summary of the article you were commenting on, you would see that that accounted for 33%. C'mon. That didn't even require going TFA but rather just reading the summary before commenting.

Re:Some have a more nuanced view (2)

s.petry (762400) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183953)

I would think that this view is the most common among the intellectual crowds. I have worked with hundreds of PHDs over the years, and had some long fun discussions regarding the subject. A few were agnostic, but most believe in a creator without the traditional Religious beliefs. I'd say at least half participated in traditional Religious practices and saw nothing morally wrong with them.

Evolution as a Creation (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183607)

What if you believe in evolution as a divine creation?

Re:Evolution as a Creation (2)

SebNukem (188921) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183667)

I don't know why you got downvoted but it does make a lot more sense than the Genesis tale.

Re:Evolution as a Creation (2)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183709)

Then you don't believe humans were created IN THEIR PRESENT FORM WITHIN THE LAST 10,000 YEARS. You only believe the very first part, humans were created and therefore SHOULD answer no on the poll.

Re:Evolution as a Creation (2)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183959)

Sorry, I should have RTFA first. It wasn't a yes/no question it was a three parter. You would answer "humans evolved, God guided the process" Which would put you in the 32% group as of the latest poll. Interestingly, it is this group which seems to have lost the most people at the same time as the young earth group gained.

Re:Evolution as a Creation (1)

jgtg32a (1173373) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183769)

Then you are part of the 32%

Re:Evolution as a Creation (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183965)

Then you fail at applying Occam's Razor.

Here we go. (-1)

virgnarus (1949790) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183615)

2000+ commented article coming right up.

Re:Here we go. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183713)

Yeah, this one just blows unless you're into sensationalism. Anyone can have an opinion on it and no one will leave smarter than when they came in.

Why (-1, Offtopic)

choadchimmie (906563) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183639)

is this a story on Slashdot?

translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183641)

46% of americans are dumb sheep..

"Divinely guided"? (2)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183643)

How does "divinely guided" work?

"Let's see, longer legs, smoother teeth, less fur,....um....fuckit man, let's go Vegas-style tonight: Be There a Random Mutation!"
   

Re:"Divinely guided"? (2)

hey! (33014) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183839)

How does "divinely guided" work?

Well, there's nobody who could reasonably claim to answer that question with any authority, but if you'd like speculation then it *might* work like the Monolith did in 2001: Find an animal that's close to what you want and nudge it in a direction that favors the traits you're looking for.

If you're only interested in results rather than specific means, you don't necessarily have to mess with genetic engineering. Potentially you could do this on an entirely behavioral level then let natural selection take care of the details, which is what I take the Monolith to have done in 2001.

Re:"Divinely guided"? (1)

aBaldrich (1692238) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183937)

This is interesting: according to the poll, the group with the highest likelihood of believing in a God-guided evolution are the people with post-graduate studies, at 42%.
Think about it. 42% of all American PhDs believe something along the lines of intelligent design? That's news to me. But it makes sense, it's the best way to join religion and science.

Re:"Divinely guided"? (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183941)

Divinely guided simply means that you don't believe that man sprung fully formed from the mind of a God, but you don't know enough about statistical variation and the libraries of research which show how very complex conditions can arise through random mutation and fitness selections.

You could say that the poll is roughly split between a group which believes in the science (but may not understand how complete it is, so allows the hand of God to make sure we ended up as humans), and a group which is so bereft of learning and logic as to believe - word for word - a collection of stories written when the earth was flat, infinite, and at the center of the universe.

It's not surprising that the latter exists, it's that they very well may outnumber the former.

~79%? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183659)

So, roughly 79% of Americans believe in some form of a divine entity, yet we have to sanitize all public places from anything remotely religious so as to appease the ~21% that either don't believe or haven't decided?

Sounds about right.

Re:~79%? (1, Troll)

Blahah (1444607) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183791)

Yes, because the 21% are the sensible ones.

Re:~79%? (2, Insightful)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183837)

You conservatives keep talking about how great the Constitution is, yet want to ignore the parts you don't like, such as the separation of church and state.

Re:~79%? (1)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | more than 2 years ago | (#40184031)

Many religious individuals don't want public prayers, and don't want the Ten Commandments in public schools(Catholic, Protestant or Jewish version and which set given that the text is repeated twice in the Bible), and damn well don't want someone else's theology like intelligent design put in their kids' science classrooms. A lot of Jews for example are probably in the 79%. The First Amendment protects everyone, whether religious or not religious.

I believe in a varient of creationism (1)

magsk (1316183) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183661)

My belief is that Human where created by advanced extraterrestrials, when I look at our progress as a species over past 50 years, I think that as long as we dont kill ourselves in the 50 years we should be at a place where we can create new humans from scratch, or from genetic modification. I believe us humans on earth where created by such a seeding operation, either as an experiment or a pay it forward or just that as a seeding exercise. So my creationism is based entirely on the notion that science and technology created us.

No need to wait 50 years to create new humans! (1)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183787)

Get busy right now! First step, get out of the basement. Second step, take a shower. Third step, get intoxicated in a bar. From there, viable opportunities for procreation will be viable and numerous. Go forth young fellow, spread your seed!

Explains a lot (3, Insightful)

trevc (1471197) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183699)

And people still wonder why this country is in such a mess....

How can so many people... (1)

cplusplus (782679) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183701)

...be so wrong?

They aren't wrong (2)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183811)

They are living embodiments of social Darwinism, just don't tell them that!

Re:How can so many people... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40184001)

Because the main point of a faith is ... faith, which means no matter what you see hear or understand, you must still have faith that the ________ religion is correct. It doubles down because those with no faith burn in hell for an eternity. Not very comfortable. It's actually brilliant, brilliant social engineering.

Error in the title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183747)

Can you change America for United States in the title? As a canadian and a resident of the continent named America, I don't want to have anything to do with this bunch of retarded idiots.

Thanks

That last 15%... (2)

eagee (1308589) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183761)

is bumming me out... I mean, really? Only 15%? Come on people!

I don't want to live on this planet anymore. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183773)

Where's my spaceship.

Ashamed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183777)

I'm ashamed to be an American when polls like this are being discussed. Belief in angels is another one that really gets me... George Carlin covered this one at length.

The reason Christianity has this problem. (5, Insightful)

Zombie Ryushu (803103) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183783)

You'd think this is actually just the ignorance of 'Dumb Americans.' That isn't so. The reason is evolution is a deal breaker due to the structure of the Christian religion.

Kalinka told me the following.

It doesn't have anything to say about the existence or non-existence of any gods. It is a problem with the way the Mythos of Christianity works in particular.

The Mythos of Christianity absolutely depends on a a literal understanding of Genesis. In Judaism, Genesis can be metaphor, it changes nothing. But the Sacrifice of Jesus is contingent on an event called the fall of man, where Eve and Adam ate the fruit from the tree of knowledge, angering Yahweh (God) and damning all Humans to Hell save for a few Jewish Prophets and anyone who accepts Jesus as the Savior.

The fall of man is considered the *Primary Sin* which sends us to Hell. (The main Reason.)

If The Book of Genesis is metaphorical, then Jesus died for nothing because no fall of man ever occurred for Yahweh to have a reason to send us to Hell to begin with. Ergo, Christianity is collapses because Saint Paul was a liar.

This is why Christians have a problem with Evolution and Jews do not.

The real reason that this doctrine that Paul created was put into place was to exclude the Jews from Salvation.

He didn't for see the evolution problem. That came along later.

If the Garden of Eden never happened, the fall never happened. then there would be no need for the death of Jesus Christ. Which means that Christianity was wrong all along. Biological evolution collapses a core foundation of Christianity.

Re:The reason Christianity has this problem. (4, Informative)

hoppo (254995) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183885)

Catholic dogma treats the book of Genesis as an allegorical work.

Re:The reason Christianity has this problem. (2)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183957)

If The Book of Genesis is metaphorical, then Jesus died for nothing because no fall of man ever occurred for Yahweh to have a reason to send us to Hell to begin with.

I'm admittedly not religious, but I don't follow your argument (well, not yours but the one you're relating). If 'the fall of man' is defined as mankind disobeying god why does the fall have to happen precisely in the way genesis describes? Is there a man alive who has followed all of God's rules (as defined in by the Bible since our discussion is already centered on Christianity)? I doubt it. We all disobey so logically we have all fallen (I'm sure an apologist could argue that even being tempted to disobey is a sign of having falling), where would the contradiction exist in that scenario?

Re:The reason Christianity has this problem. (2)

ChetOS.net (936869) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183973)

Exclude Jews from salvation? The book of Hebrews (probably written by Paul) explains that all the sacrifies that the Jews did for hundreds of years prior pointed to the coming of, and execution of, Christ. Christ fulfulled all of those promises, therefore all the Jews who obeyed the Law as set forth in Exodus and Deuteronomy have salvation.

Now, Paul also says (in Romans) that Jesus made the law irrelevent by his death, so there is no longer salvation for simply obeying those laws.

Re:The reason Christianity has this problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40184025)

Jesus came to save us from dumb stuff like litteral interpretations. The word that matters is not written on dead trees.

Biased question. (2)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183827)

If they ask "Do human beings share a common ancestor with present day apes?" a lot more people say would say yes.

America what? You mean United States? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183865)

First, I'm an American, as I live in America continent, but I have nothing to do with U.S.A.
The pool, as I read, was conducted in U.S. So, they dumb people here are the United Statians, and not Americans.
Please, do not mess with Mexicans, Brazilians, Canadians and all others that have nothing to do with this pool.

Re:America what? You mean United States? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40183977)

Oh, shut up. You are not the first person to make this observation, and it's just as stupid now as it was the last ten thousand times. While technically correct that nearly everyone born in the Western Hemisphere is from one of the American continents, the use of the descriptor "American" is used pretty exclusively, worldwide, to reference citizens of the United States. And you know it. So, shut up.

I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough! (1)

rlseaman (1420667) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183869)

In related news, 46% of Americans believe themselves "above average".

Re:I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough! (2)

chispito (1870390) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183983)

In related news, 46% of Americans believe themselves "above average".

I can assure you that at least 46% of Americans are "above average" for Americans.

There's some degree of conflict (5, Interesting)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183877)

Gallup and a few others have consistently gotten numbers between 40-48% for this data, but for reasons I don't fully understand, CBS polls on the same issue get slightly higher results. They get routinely in the 50-55% range http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500160_162-965223.html [cbsnews.com] . I'm not sure why this discrepancy exists, but it isn't a single yearly issue and it doesn't seem to be connected to how the questions are phrased, which suggests there's some more subtle issue going on.

The data for both this years Gallup poll and previous years does show some fairly predictable patterns. For example, by most of the previous polls, around 60% of Republicans are Young Earth Creationists while a little under 40% of Democrats are Young Earth Creationists. http://www.gallup.com/poll/108226/Republicans-Democrats-Differ-Creationism.aspx [gallup.com] . This should not however be taken as general evidence that Republicans or conservatives are dumb or uneducated. The GSS as part of their regular survey does a set about general science knowledge, and that data suggests that when not asking questions about evolution or age of the Earth, progressives and conservatives look very similar, and there's some evidence that the people with the least science knowledge are self-identified moderates http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/03/the-republican-fluency-with-science/ [discovermagazine.com] although exactly what is going on is not clear. http://religionsetspolitics.blogspot.com/2011/04/political-affiliation-and-scientific.html [blogspot.com] . This is part of a general trend which suggests that moderates in the US are often not very well informed.

Also, while Gallup says that the fraction of people who reject evolution has stayed roughly constant, there's a potentially more interesting trend in the data, over the last 30 years there's been a steady increase in people who say that evolution occurred with God taking no part in the process. http://www.gallup.com/poll/108226/Republicans-Democrats-Differ-Creationism.aspx [gallup.com] . Most of that is movement not from the strict creationists but from a reduction in the size of the group that thinks that evolution happened with God guiding it. This may reflect the general decline of the moderately religious, especially so called "mainline Protestants" or it may be due to other effects such as general increases in partisanship.

So, slightly less than half the population... (5, Funny)

ebunga (95613) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183889)

Slightly less than half the population has below average intelligence.

Why I don't believe the poll (5, Funny)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 2 years ago | (#40183987)

As an American, I prefer to ignore your statistic for so many of us being creationists, and I am not interested in your so-called evidence that the figure is correct. The number just feels wrong, therefore it must be a lie. My gut tells me there aren't nearly that many creationists around here, because neither I nor the people I know, are anything like that!

Furthermore, I don't understand how many people could be creationists, so that's another argument that not nearly many of them could be.

Finally, your poll is biased and invalid, because .. because .. I want it to be.

Ad Populum (1)

JohnPerkins (243021) | more than 2 years ago | (#40184013)

Ad Populum, or the fallacy of appealing to popularity.

What X number of people believe in no way affects whether or not God exists / created mankind / etc..

What kind of a worm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40184017)

wrote that summary? Whenever there are statistics, you really must say how many people were polled. Otherwise it's completely meaningless. And yes, it belongs to the fucking summary! Jesus!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>