Posted on 10/23/2009 8:18:13 PM PDT by john in springfield
After spending time on some of the recent discussions here at FR about Young Earth Creationism (YEC) and other points of view (which I will call Old Earth Creationism (OEC) and Naturalistic Evolution), I found myself wondering: how many FReepers (and how many Americans) hold each particular view?
Obviously, there aren't any statistics on FReepers. But there are on Americans as a whole, and on certain groups of Americans.
The best general resource I've found so far on people's viewpoints is located here. I will summarize some of those here.
(Note: This page uses slightly different terms for a couple of these viewpoints, but as far as I can tell, they mean the same thing.)
About 45% accept the Young Earth Creationist viewpoint, about 37% accept the Old Earth Creationist viewpoint, and around 12% to 14% accept the Naturalistic Evolution viewpoint.
This has held fairly steady over the past 25 years or so. The percentage who believe in NE may have increased slightly, but overall, the numbers have held fairly steady.
A CBS News poll gave a bit different percentages: YEC 55%, OEC 27%, NE 13%.
Observations:
There are a lot of people who believe in young earth creationism, and there are also a lot of people who believe in old earth creationism as well.
The vast majority of Americans believe in God.
The majority of Americans believe in evolution.
The numbers change significantly among the college-educated:
YEC: 25%
OEC: 54%
NE: 17%
It is interesting to me that most - a full 54% - college-educated Americans accept the Old-Earth Creationist (or theistic evolutionist) view.
Note also the effect that a college education seems to have: With a few exceptions, people who go to college don't stop believing in God. However, quite a few do seem to shift from YEC to OEC.
This graph also means that an awful lot of people who don't go to college believe in YEC rather than in either OEC or NE.
Note that while this poll is nearly 20 years old, based on what we know from some other polls, overall beliefs do not seem to have changed greatly during this time.
YEC: 5%
OEC: 40%
NE: 55%
Note: The word "scientist" seems to be very vague in this poll, which apparently includes a lot of people with professional degrees in fields completely unrelated to biology, geology, etc.
In any event, a majority of "scientists" don't seem to believe that God was involved in the development of life on earth. It's not a very large majority, though. "Scientists" are divided as to whether God was involved. Most of those who think He was believe that this involvement included the process of evolution.
However, given that only 5% of "scientists" support YEC, the under-1% figure may well be true. I just don't know. Nor do I have access to the original 1987 Newsweek article to see exactly how they got their information.
If there's another poll or two out there on this, it might be interesting to know about.
A 2007 Harris Poll showed the following percentages of Christians who accept the theory of evolution:
Catholics: 43%
Protestants: 30%
"Born-Again Christians": 16%
Finally, a 2005 CBS Poll stated that a full two thirds (67%) of Americans believe that it's possible for one to believe both in God and in evolution.
It depends on the modifier. Communist and a hard-left “education” are bad (such as the reeducation one would receive at an Ivy League school, a UC school, etc). It can be useful if you plan to use their education against them, as do so many conservatives, creationists, and IDers. But even then, that option takes a back seat to a truly good education, such as are taught at our top Conservative and Christian private schools. This is precisely why the more education you get from our leftist universities, the more like you are to vote for Obama, or believe darwood’s evo-religious creation myth.
DC does seem to be the roost of many of the disruptive types
here.
Real spoilers, in more ways than one.
Mar 13, 2009 From Darwin Central, Whattajoke writes this diminutive description of Fischori, a Freeper, and he pisses all over FR. Watch for the choice of words:
Here's my deal...
I quit posting on FR after the "purge..."
So I waded back into the murk that is FR right around election time - A good time to get back into it, I though.
I thought wrong. I recognized hardly anyone, and there was this new guy, GGG....As for Fichori, do we really care? Ho poses no threat to our person. He's a complete goofball who adds nothing to a single thread he's ever posted in over there. [Full disclosure: I just read this whole thread.] He's most likely a 30-something single guy, physically unattractive, socially retarded, with a grudge against the world because it didn't give him what he wanted at some point.... If I get around to it, I'll write an opus explaining how FR has turned to crap. Either that, or Fichori will copy and paste this paragraph to get me banned. Hey Fichori -
Hmmm what was that word he used there to describe a loyal Freeper? Uhhh.... I believe he just said socially "retarded"
There you have it. Mods. I told you he was phoney, was baiting the discussion and he was baiting you too. I'll leave it to you to deal with him
Ol' ugly banned balrog666 was certainly happy to have Whattajoke back over to Darwin Central. Coyoteman still sounds pissed and like he's got a touch of IBS over there. Licking his scabies too no doubt.
On another thread: Did you see the article posted on “Lucy’s” diet and teeth?
“This is precisely why the more education you get from our leftist universities, the more like you are to vote for Obama, or believe darwood’s evo-religious creation myth.”
It could also be that at Christian private schools, the education you get in sciences - especially if they teach literal Genesis as science - is simply inadequate and the students are not equipped to understand, much less agree with complex scientific theories.
I don’t think you’d find a correlation between “real” academic majors that require rigor and hard work and your Obama voters. I think that sort of ignorance is part of non-rigorous colleges and fields of study. I think that it is very difficult to obtain a rigorous science education at a Christian-based school if they stick to literal Biblical concepts, so in that way the average Christian school college graduate is more inline with the average college-educated Obama voter.
of course, my statements are just as unproven as yours.
Which one are you talking about?
This:
Ancient ‘Lucy’ Species Ate A Different Diet Than Previously Thought
Saturday, October 24, 2009 12:30:08 AM · by SunkenCiv · 10 replies · 359+ views
PhysOrg.com ^ | October 22nd, 2009 | University of Arkansas
Its not Chuck Norris that the cowardly troublemakers from thither swampland are checking under their peat bogs for.
I can’t help but laugh at the claims on that thread that I’m ‘unattractive/overweight/retarded/etc.’
The ‘overweight’ jab still gives me much mirth. (I have a BMI of ~20.1)
Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.
I’m not sure what planet you are from, but on my planet “Socially retarded” is very different than using “retarded” as a pejorative.
What is wrong with you? I can’t think of a worse “advertisement” for your brand of Christianity than you. Not only that, you whine and cry to the mods like a 4 year old. Why? What went wrong in your life?
At the very least, I hope you ask for forgiveness next time you pray.
For what it’s worth, I too do not understand “Christians” who use every opportunity to treat others in ways that would make the devil blush.
The funny thing about that thread, is it started out as a welcome thread.
I didn’t know about it until I was alerted to it by a DCer after it was pretty much winding down.
Of course, all the good threads got moved into their, um, members only ‘bash/troll FR’ forum. (they got caught with their skivvies down one too many times, ya know)
Sorry, no time to read. As you might have guessed, I started another thread while you were writing your diatribe. All the best :o)
—GGG
Yeah, "evo-retard" works for you and that whattajoke of a "PhD" you allegedly have when you don't even know that peer reviewed journals are magazines! A "retread" you may be too, and if true that is sure to come out in time. If and when it does, it won’t be pretty.
I often have the privilege of sniffing your types out in both academic and corporate research institutions and have had the pleasure of showing a few of your academic pretender-buddies to the door.
They're the ones who likely finished an online PhD at some institution they found advertised on the back of a match book, and are generally revealed by serial practical and conceptual incompetencies. Or maybe they're people who started in a PhD program and never finished their thesis, because they washed out. Many of these are as personally compromised as they are intellectually inept and can be found stealing others research and claiming it as their own, or blaming their screw-ups on others.
You remind me a lot of another poster who calls himself some sort of scientist – “Electric Strawballs” -- or something like that. Doesn't know the difference between myosin, Myocin, and -mycin. He's probably got a GRE, and likely works as a 3rd shift glassware jocky in a groundwater testing lab someplace.
What flushes you out in these discussions is that you have yet to demonstrate that you even know what are the basic, and most rudimentary tools of scientific research. You come across completely unstudied and intellectually lazy.
As for your intellectual gurus: an un-accomplished, non-formally scientifically trained medical school drop-out, racist, and failed theologian wanna be -- Darwin -- who was championed by his equally racist, misogynistic "bulldog" sidekick and contemporary mouthpiece, Tommy Huxley -- academically accomplished in NO discipline whatsoever. Wow, now there's some intellectual heft! (/sarc)
But still there they are: your intellectual gurus -- you, a supposed PhD -- and credentials like Darwin's and Bulldog are credible enough for you to form a cognitive foundation upon their laughable premises and then upon which you have then chosen to base your "scientific," religious, and philosophical world-view.
Somehow even "evo-tard" is a term entirely too kind, especially for some of those banned Darwin Central drama queens.
So far you just sound like little more than another one of those wash outs cruising for that intellectual pink-slip of life. Darwin Central is populated with enough of them already. Maybe you'd like to join them like ol' "whattajackass" did.
My goodness. That was epic. Thank you.
Feel the love! Agamemnon’s “witnessing” is truly a blessing! What a beacon of light!
Your rather ample supply of anger and venom is quite startling. Your seething post seems to point to a failed academic career. (Your creationism confirms that.)
I don’t know what went wrong in your life, nor will I even guess, but I hope you find peace someday.
Why such hate in your heart to those that disagree with you?
Why resort to name calling?
Why not post scientific proof to back up your points instead?
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.