http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/darwin-birthday-believe-evolution.aspx
This grew from questions I had after reading a post that seemed to pit "believing in evolution" against "Christian" and "God." Specifically, I wondered how many people believe in both God and evolution.
I haven't tried to push a particular viewpoint in this article, just objectively report what I found out about how many Americans take a particular viewpoint. But feel free to flame away regardless.
It would be interesting to do a poll of FReepers if that were possible.
Bookmark and BFLR.
Your domain.
Still think that science shouldnt be a popularity contest, or Obama would be the king of Science.
Very good job. Thanks!
I think the last graph … % of Christians Who Believe in Evolution, to be quite revealing.
Was Last Thursdayism mentioned?
I believe it takes more faith to believe in Evolution then it does in Creationism.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/darwin-birthday-believe-evolution.aspx
Could we say that if one does not believe that God could have (or did) created the heavens and earth in 6 days that someday they will be granted the opportunity to tell Him that.
Common sense says to believe that all peoples on this earth today come from only two people is a form of evolution.
That means that the ‘speed’ in which evolution takes place is the argument not that evolution does not take place. No where is it Written that God loaded up the DNA to produce out of two human beings all His children.
ping to those people I know of who seem interested in the issue. :-)
Another FReeper did a poll about a month ago and FR is split pretty evenly among YEC, ID, EV, and Other. I remember the biggest discussion was that the line of just Evolution versus Young Earth was far too limited. For example, many of us identify as Theistic Evolutionists (position accepted by the Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican and some Protestant denominations). There are also Young Earth ID’ers and Old Earth ID’ers. Then you have the literalsts in several camps from the 6k literalists (Young Earth Creationists) to the Genesis 1:2 to Genesis 1:2 time gappers (those that hold there were millions of years gap between those to verses but that life is only 6K years old). You also have the Young Earthers who believe that the Earth is both young and old- it was created to be millions of years old, only 6K years ago. I can go on and on with all the theories.
The point of all that is that those who try to divide based on one line- an either or prospect, or measure by said line, really don’t understand all the beliefs out there.
It also goes to show that the stereotypes of all being robots of one thought are also wrong.
It’s been a couple of hundred years now, and scientists have forgotten that uniformitarianism is a postulate, not a fact. Their belief that the same physical laws apply now as applied in the past is a matter of faith, not of science.
The question scientists ask of the past is not “what happened”, but “what is what would be most likely to have happened, if the current scientific laws held then, as now.”
This postulate rules out the possibility of creation as a supernatural phenomenon.
But, and it’s a big but, scientific research has clearly demonstrated that there are structures all around us that would have taken far more time than the young earth creationist hypothesis would allow for, unless the earth was created already containing features that had the appearance of having age.
In other words, if God created the world 6000 years ago, he created it in such a way that it looked far older. Which means that if God did, in fact, create the universe 6000 years ago, he created it so that it was indistinguishable from one that had evolved over millenia.
And scientists, operating under their fundamental guiding postulate, are studying the history that God created into the universe, rather than the history of the Universe. That is, what would have been the history of the universe, had it actually evolved, instead of having been created by God with an embedded history.
Which leaves us with a philosophical question. Is there any difference? Is what scientists do any more or any less valid, whether the history they study is real, or was simply created by God?
No.
Is faith in a divinely created world challenged in any way by scientific fact?
No.
I knew something was strange with your data! Your label OEC is incorrect. OEC is NOT theistic evolution.
I see a false premise with the OEC view.
The presumption is that OE theory also accepts evolution to some degree at least... or is categorized along with some form of mix of creation and evolution.
Geological evidence proves that the earth is billions of years old, but evolutionary theory/studies fail to prove that life on earth is also billions of years old.
Therefore I submit that a fourth category is missing...
OR, that OEC should be segregated from OE+naturalistic evolution (OENE)
Just because the earth is billions of years old does not necessarily mean that life on earth is also billions of years old as well.
There is no room for a mix of creationist theory with evolutionary theory. They are mutually exclusive.
I saw a video by some “save the bears from global warming” morons, and when Polar bears showed up and mingled with Brown bears to feed on this dead whale, they exclaimed in amazement. “Look the Polar bears are soooooo hungry they are competing with the Brown bears for food!!!
No, you IDIOTS, they showed up because there is a HUGE DEAD WHALE TO EAT! It's called FOOD. Food attracts ALL bears. They have the best sense of smell of any animal by a mile, actually TWENTY MILES.
|
Obama/McCain |
||||
|
High school |
47 |
53 |
||
|
College |
55 |
45 |
||
|
Postgrad |
65 |
35 |
||