Fear not, the FRevolution Brigade will be along shortly to tear down the poll and to explain that no one other than barefoot snake-handlers could possibly doubt evolution. One of them will probably cut-and-paste/regurgitate his list of mighty links that show us a bunch of ape skulls labeled as transitional fossils, and make it seem that every scientist on the planet believes in evolution. How many posts will it take?
I knew a majority of Americans believed in creation, but I'm pleasantly surprised by the size of the majority. Praise God.
MM
Of course, it should be noted, no creationist has been able to rebut the fact that that link clearly shows transition.
But then, creationists aren't big on evidence.
You do know that we don't do science by majority decision, don't you? Science is done by observing what can be observed and drawing inferences from these observations.
Observation 1: there don't appear to be any fossils of modern rabbits, humans, cows, dogs, cats, etc. in precambrian rock layers.
Observation 2: The fossils found in older rock layer typically appear to be fossils of organisms that do not exist today.
Observation 3: it seems that fossils of simpler life forms appear in older, deeper rock layers and the newer rock layers contain life forms that are increasingly complex. (Note: this observation does not in any way rely on radiometric dating. It simply relies on the fact that deeper rock layers are older than shallower ones.)
Observation 4: among animal population, not all of the animals are able to survive and reproduce. Genetics tells us that the ones that are better able to do so will pass their genes on to their offspring.
Observation 5: When organisms reproduce, they do not necessarily produce perfect copies of themselves. There are errors (mutations) in the genetic material.
Connect these dots and where do you arrive? You arrive at the idea that simple organisms were all that existed at one time and that over time, the frequency of various genes in the gene pool of these organisms changed. That is the essence of evolution. There may be questions regarding the speed or the mechanisms of evolution, but until there's an alternative scientific explanation for why it seems that organisms have changed over time. Creationism does not fit the bill. I defy you to give me a prediction that is made by creationism. Please make it such that if the prediction is found to be untrue, you will be forced to change your belief. Far from being a flaw of evolution, the fact that it has been modified to fit new observations is a strength. That is the essence of a scientific theory. Creationism (or ID, basically the same idea) simply does not fit the bill. Both of these are unfalsifiable.