Posted on 10/23/2005 12:06:32 AM PDT by GretchenM
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--A majority of adults support the biblical account of creation according to a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll -- the latest in a series of polls reflecting Americans' tendency to reject secular evolution.
In the poll, 53 percent of adults say "God created human beings in their present form exactly the way the Bible describes it." Another 31 percent believe humans "evolved over millions of years from other forms of life and God guided" the process. Twelve percent say humans "have evolved over millions of years from other forms of life, but God has no part."
The poll of 1,005 adults, conducted Sept. 8-11 and posted on Gallup's website Oct. 13, is but the latest survey showing Americans tend to reject a strictly secular explanation for the existence of life:
-- A Harris poll of 1,000 adults in June found that 64 percent believe "human beings were created directly by God," 22 percent say humans "evolved from earlier species" and 10 percent believe humans "are so complex that they required a powerful force or intelligent being to help create them." In another question, only 38 percent say humans "developed from earlier species."
-- An NBC News poll of 800 adults in March found that 44 percent believe in a biblical six-day creation, 13 percent in a "divine presence" in creation and 33 percent in evolution.
"Nobody starts out as a Darwinian evolutionist," said William Dembski, professor of science and theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., and the author of "The Design Revolution: Answering the Toughest Questions about Intelligent Design."
"You start out with a wonder of creation, thinking that there's something beyond it. And then it has to be explained to you why there really is no wonder behind it."
The Gallup poll was released amidst a trial in Harrisburg, Pa., over whether Intelligent Design can be taught in a Pennsylvania school district. Intelligent Design says that patterns in nature are best explained by pointing to a creator (that is, intelligence). Supporters of the theory of Darwinian evolution have opposed Intelligent Design, saying it is not science. Evolution teaches, in part, that humans evolved over millions of years from apes.
But despite the fact that public schools are teaching evolution as fact, Americans are not buying it. A November 2004 poll of 1,016 adults found that 35 percent said evolution was "just one of many theories and one that has not been well-supported by evidence." Thirty-five percent said evolution was "well-supported by evidence," while 28 percent didn't know enough about evolution to answer. In addition, a February 2001 poll of 1,016 adults found that 48 percent said the "theory of creationism" best explained the origin of human beings while 28 percent said the "theory of evolution" made the most sense.
Reflecting the argument Paul makes in Romans 1, Dembski said the "beauty" and the "extravagance" of creation -- the "beautiful sunsets, flowers and butterflies" -- points to the existence of a creator.
"Unless you're really indoctrinated into an atheistic mindset, I think [the beauty of creation] is going to keep tugging at our hearts and minds," he said.
Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, called the Gallup poll findings "incredible" and said they should be "encouraging" to conservative Christians. ...
Said Dembski: "The secularized education system ... is not being executed as effectively as the secular elites would like. So that's something that we have to be thankful for -- that a lot of schools are not implementing it and forcing it down kids' throats. But it's still happening, and as far as it happens, the indoctrination can be quite effective."
For example, Dembski said, there is little public outcry over PBS programs such as "Nature" that are publicly funded and regularly present evolution as fact. Also, Americans themselves seem conflicted over what to believe. An August Gallup poll found that 58 percent said creationism was definitely or probably true and 55 percent said evolution was definitely or probably true -- meaning that many of those surveyed saw no conflict between creationism and evolution. And the Harris poll that found only 22 percent of adults believing humans evolved from earlier species also found that 46 percent believe apes and humans have a "common ancestry."
Americans, Dembski said, often try to take a middle road by believing God guided evolution. Nevertheless, he said, the poll numbers are promising for Intelligent Design proponents who are making their case in the public square.
"I think anybody who is on the God-had-something-to-do-with-it side -- whether it's through a direct act of creation or through some sort of evolution process -- is likely to give Intelligent Design a second look,” Dembski said. “We have a great pool of people that we can appeal to.
That the survey could go either way + or - 50%:)
Think about that one for a minute...
The “origin of species” is rooted in the idea of a singularity: the mechanics of the DNA molecule. All species of Terran life has it. Like the singularity of the “Big Bang” theory, the two are categorically inseparable as immaculate conceptions. It only takes a mere application of logic.
The perplexing question of human origin from a common ancestor to apes is even more problematic. According to evolutionary theory, humans (homo sapiens) did not descend from apes, but from some “missing link.” Although Dr. Louis Leaky spent decades searching and found zinjanthropus and homo habilus, Olduvai Gorge gave no answers. Logic also suggests in order to “descend,” there has to be something to descend from and something to ascend to.
Evolutionary theory, rooted in the universal human dissatisfaction for mortality is a vain search for human origin(s), an attempt to rationalize a yearning for connection to something eternal.
Now, since nobody really knows the answers, it is only a scientific method that would consider all points of view on the issue in educational settings. To do otherwise would be like students dancing around totems, witch doctors proclaiming intellectual taboos and making sacrifices.
This is far worse than what the ersatz secularists accuse the creationists of doing!
It's a very good thing Science isn't put to a vote. A majority of American Newspapers publish horoscopes too.
Same here. Lots of fun watching people try to reconcile their beliefs with known science. Some, like you and I, agree that God created evolution. Others are so stuck on their beliefs that they can't see past the covers of their Bible. Others, who believe strictly in evolution, can't give God any credit. It's fun to watch.
I would have to agree, but for a slightly different reason.
If you look at the underlying current in each point of view, you will see that the discussion is a thin veil over the real issue: morality.
If the creationists are right, then there is a God who can and does make a moral claim on our lives.
If the evolutionists are right, then NO ONE can make a moral claim on our lives.
When I see these debates, THAT is what I see being discussed.
2 cents.
"Intelligent Design (or ID) is the controversial assertion that certain features of the universe and of living things exhibit the characteristics of a product resulting from an intelligent cause or agent, not an unguided process such as natural selection. Though publicly most ID advocates state that their focus is on detecting evidence of design in nature without regard to who or what the designer might be, in statements to their constituents and supporters, nearly all state explicitly that they believe the designer to be God (as understood in the Christian tradition)."
So, from that point, what exactly would you teach the children? About who the designer may be? How the designer may have had an influence on creation and/or evolution? To do that you would have to use books that explain these different Intelligent Designers. Where do we get these books and ideas of these intelligent designers? Well I can think of many but the Bible comes quickly to mind. So now that we're teaching ID we need to teach about the designer and how he designed it. Right?
Sounds like Sunday School to me and the students can attend those on their own accord, not forced upon them at public school.
Instead of teaching our kids different "beliefs" on who the designer possibly is and what role this designer possibly played, we say Darwin's theory is a scientific theory and some believe there may be an intelligent designer and it's up to you students to decide what you want to believe in so here in school we will teach biology and the theory of evolution and if you want to learn about Intelligent Design then You need to go to church or wherever you decide to find enlightenment on the creator of your choosing.
And, from this your conclusion is . . . ?
Morality and all of its associated concepts are from the belief that some higher power is defining what is correct for human behavior. Today, “morals” are a religious pagan philosophy of esoteric hobgoblins where transfiguration is from pantheons of fantasies as the medium of infinitization. Others get derision for having an unwavering Judaic belief in Yahweh or Yeshua, although their critics will evangelize insertion of phantasmagoric fetishisms into secular law.
Plato’s Euthyphro is a great illustration. Socrates advances the argument to Euthyphro that, piety to the gods, who all want conflicting devotions and/or actions from humans, is impossible. (Socrates exposed the pagan esoteric sophistry.)
Likewise, morals are such a construction of idols used by the Left as a rationale for them to demand compliance to their wishes in politics, which most often are a skewed mess of fallacies in logic. “Morals” are a deceptive replacement for the “avoidance of sin.”
But since we are all properly obeying * the modern interpretation * of the First Amendment... Good or bad isn’t the question. Good, bad, right, wrong, evil, moral: all of these are purely religious. Morality and all of its associated concepts are based on the belief that some higher power is defining the correctness of human behavior. * The First Amendment says that Government must exorcise all traces of religion and theism from itself. * (The “modern interpretation.”) Therefore, the Government should never consider issues of morality and of right and wrong. Excuse the sarcasm...
Therefore, it becomes a question of benefits versus costs, not a question of right and wrong. Fetus killing has its benefits to society, especially if you like to sleep late on Saturday. However, it also has its costs as well. Society (by which I mean whoever manages to seize power) needs to evaluate these costs and decide accordingly.
"Fetus killing has its benefits to society, especially if you like to sleep late on Saturday. However, it also has its costs as well. "
Contraception is a lot cheaper, and no one has to die.
...and you STILL get to sleep late. ;)
No, it is not.
Evolutionist theory rests entirely upon a presupposition that life is an immaculate conception.
Think about that one for a minute...
The “origin of species” is rooted in the idea of a singularity: the mechanics of the DNA molecule. All species of Terran life has it. Like the singularity of the “Big Bang” theory, the two are categorically inseparable as immaculate conceptions. It only takes a mere application of logic.
The perplexing question of human origin from a common ancestor to apes is even more problematic. According to evolutionary theory, humans (homo sapiens) did not descend from apes, but from some “missing link.” Although Dr. Louis Leaky spent decades searching and found zinjanthropus and homo habilis, Olduvai Gorge gave no answers. Logic also suggests in order to “descend,” there has to be something you descend from and something you ascend to.
Evolutionary theory, rooted in the universal human dissatisfaction for mortality is a vain search for human origin(s), an attempt to rationalize a yearning for connection to something eternal.
Now, since nobody really knows the answers, it is only a scientific method to consider all points of view on the issue in educational settings. To do otherwise would be like students dancing around totems, with professors as witch doctors proclaiming intellectual taboos and making sacrifices.
This is far worse than what the ersatz secularists accuse the creationists of doing!
Despite decades of evolutionary indoctrination at all levels of education, it appears the American People are smarter and more resilient than the secularist bandwagon envisioned!
===========================================================
Yeah, they might teach spelling and punctuation, too. That'd be good.
"50% of americans have IQ's below 100 (by definition)."
Clearly the implication here is that the reason people believe in creation is because they are not intelligent enough to *see* that evolution is *true*. It comes across pretty clearly on these threads that IF ONLY people would really learn about the ToE and understand it, they OF COURSE would be compelled to believe it because the evidence is so compelling that any person of any intelligence would have to come to that conclusion. The accusation is always that, "You don't really understand the ToE".
Of all the stuff I learned in college, the thing that inpressed me the most is that the more I learned, the more I realized we don't know. Every thing I learned just raised more questions, most of which don't have a good answer. There is a lot more speculation and conjecture in science than a lot of scientists like to admit. It isn't as hard and fast as it's put forth.
If the evolutionists are right, we die and that's the end of it, there's nothing. If the creationists are right, we die and then somebody's in big trouble.
You are so right. The more you read about science, the more you realize how often the words "possibly" and "maybe" are used.
Sometimes I take an active part. Other times it's funner just to sit back and watch. I actually believe that God inspires certain scientists--no he does not talk to them directly or anything like that, but he probably does provide the inspiration for certain ideas. I certainly give God credit for a lot of things that happen to me or that I accomplish (good that is:).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.