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.
* The First Amendment says that Government must exorcise all traces of religion and theism from itself. *
The First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law respecting the [differing & divisive] establishments of religions.
The religion clauses were designed in significant part to try to temper religious disputes: -- The social dissension that grows out of the fact that people have different religions.
Thus, it is not necessary for governments to 'exorcise all traces', but to just avoid backing specific beliefs, -- those that divide us.
second answer to same post:
There is a math term for the transitional fossil situation but I have no idea what it is.
We have fossils A and B. Wow, there's a gap. Fossil C is discovered and now, more wow, there are two gaps: A-C and C-B.
Meanwhile left-brained liberal secular humanist dorks in major universities spend hours upon hours trying to figure out sophistical ways to make people believe that D.B. Cooper was descended from monkeys in an anxiety-ridden effort to overturn Christian sexual morality.
"Funny thing is, its the same group that believes in evolution."
Given that belief in the paranbormal and belief in evolution tend to be inverse (one goes up whne the other goes down) I suspect you are wrong but I'm not sure because I couldn't find good data on it.
http://static.highbeam.com/s/skepticaltadenaca/march222001/pollsshowparanormalbeliefsontheriseevolutionbelief/
prolly closer to 80 (the average)
Wrong on every point. Sorry.
mean, median or mode?
TA'd it and taught it once. Does that qualify me?
...because if you did, you would know that evolution 101 has been disproved a long time ago, but as a religious foundation it remains. It has been replaced by punctuated equilibrium because of no transitional fossils.
Incorrect. Evolution has not been disproved. In thousands of tests for 150 years it has been supported. And that includes fields of study which did not even exist 150 years ago (genetics, DNA research, radiometric dating, etc.).
There are lots of transitional fossils. Try PatrickHenry's List-O-Links or Ichny's great post http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1410029/posts?page=661#661.
The only contention to the theory of evolution comes from religious people whose beliefs teach them otherwise. Not from science.
Theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"Hypothesis: a tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices"
Belief: any cognitive content (perception) held as true
You are referring to the corners of the earth (yes, I've read more than Genesis)?
And your credentials are?
mean, and sometimes mode, based on some posts
"there are two obvious problems with radioactive dating for geological purposes: 1) uncertainty about the composition of the original sample and 2) possible losses of material during the time span of the decay."
The original composition question is the bigger issue but it introduces uncertainty of only a few percent. Radioactive dating correlates almost perfectly with items where the age is known for some other reason - like things made in Roman times and stamped with a date.
Since Radioactive dating places the age of some rocks in the billions of years a small percentage error (or even a large percentage error) would still have the age in the billions of years.
And unlike evolution this is something that can be done in a lab and the technique can be taught in an afternoon.
The only way I have ever heard to reconcile this with the bible is that God purposely set out to test out faith by making billions of different objects all have the radioactive signature of being much old - it would have to be a deliberate and large scale trick by God.
"Science isn't conducted by polls"
No...but science is often funded by tax-payers...who are often polled and who vote in POLL BOOTHS!
Right on every point, sorry.
Things made in Roman times don't go back billions of years.
Man cannot design an amoeba, but an amoeba can design a man. Those who think themselves wise, become as fools when they worship creation rather than a Creator.
"Things made in Roman times don't go back billions of years."
No they dont. But the same basic techniques are used.
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.