Gallup has released a new poll that shows that Americans still reject the concept of evolution of humans in high numbers. Indeed, twice the number of Americans believe that humans were created by God in their current image than there are those who believe in natural evolution. Indeed, those 42 percent believe that man was created by God in the last 10,000 years. That is a considerable difference even if you focus only on anatomically modern humans which appeared in the Middle Paleolithic period about 200,000 years ago. For those who believe in the science behind evolution, the news is not all bad. Nineteen percent believe in evolution without divine involvement while another 31 percent believe that there was evolution from “less advanced forms of life” but that God directed that process. That is fifty percent. Of course, that does appear to leave eight percent that is still . . . well . . . evolving.
Creationism remains remarkably stable in our society despite the continuing discoveries of ancient bones and archeological sites. In 1982, the first such poll showed 44% believed in the theory.
Conversely, those people who believe in evolution has been growing but at a rate only Darwin would appreciate. Those accepting evolution has risen only ten percent from late 1999. When you look at church-attending Americans, the number believing in Darwinian evolution falls to only one out every 100 church goers.
However, the poll still shows that “the percentage of Americans who adhere to a strict secularist viewpoint — that humans evolved over time, with God having no part in this process — has doubled since 1999.”
What is striking is the situation with people with less than high school education– 57% believe in a creationist version of human origin while only 10% believe in an evolution without any divine intervention. The biggest change in numbers appears to come with higher education. Once at the college level, only 27% believe that God created humans in their current image while 41% accept Darwin’s theory of evolution of humans.
As we head into another presidential campaign, it will be interesting to see if this again becomes part of the debate as it did when three out of ten Republican candidates proclaimed their faith in creationism. It would seem that evolution remains a bright line division in our society.
As an academic, I find the rigidity of the faith in creationism remarkable given the continuing finds of modern human bones going back over a million years. However, it is the impact of higher education that is particularly fascinating. It is not surprising, given the views of their parents, that high schoolers would continue to hold firm on creationism. It is the extreme shift after exposure to college that seems to bring out the greatest change. Yet, that figure could be skewed in a type of self-selection (as opposed to natural selection) since the percentage of students who believe in evolution going to college may be higher. According to the government, “In October 2013, 65.9 percent of 2013 high school graduates were enrolled in colleges or universities.” That leaves roughly 33 percent who would not be included in the poll sample from the high school pool. Thus, it is not clear what percentage of students actually shift from creationist to secular views of human evolution.
angrymanspeaks, brilliant! Like you, I don’t know one way or the other. But what I do know is that bacteria have never been able to evolve, much less adapt, to survive in, say, a jar of honey, yet the same bacteria can overcome the obstacles of antibiotics and even thrive. IOW, there is a natural law that allows an organism to overcome technology but not nature, itself. The same mechanism that prevents bacteria from surviving in honey, I think, is the same mechanism that prevents one species from evolving into another species. Until I see hard evidence, I can’t subscribe to the idea that one species evolved from, say, a marine animal into a mammal. As for statistics and demographics, it all boils down to the Kool Aid that we drink. If we all just stop drinking our Kool Aid, we have no other option but to dispense with condescension (that some of us are still evolving) and agree with angrymanspeaks!
Samantha, I retrieved your comment at 1:11
davidm, good argument. PC works.
It continues to amaze positivist scientists that only 19% of the public believe them. This is what caused them in the mid 1980’s to begin a propaganda agenda to “educate” the public and put forth the tenuous authoritative statement that there is not a shred of evidence for creationism. The results of that effort has led to making the courts rule it illegal to teach the scientific aspects of creationism in public schools. Yet, even though only one view is allowed to be taught, people are still not buying it. The evidence is simply lacking, but the positivist mindset is too blind to acknowledge it.
Professor, you attempt to combine the 39% who believe in theistic evolution with the 19% who believe in the scientific perspective of evolution. That is not really proper because scientists do not consider theistic evolution any more valid a hypothesis than young earth creationism. The scientific perspective of our origins, that no God was involved, is believed only by 19%. However, this statistic has doubled since 1999, so the censorship in education and the propaganda machinery to promote only the secular viewpoint is working. I suspect most of those converted, however, do not look closely at the facts.
There was a guy on here a while back who had the best theology on the creation thing with the actual role of dog. Something about 8th Day God created Dog thing. Who was that and can someone explain it again.
What Technologies/Scientific advancements based on Evolution and the Big Bang theory should anti science creationist deniers not be using to avoid being hypocrites?
GMOs?
Gilbert wrote: In order to “know” a god exists or does not exist, one would have to be god in actuality.
You do realize what you have said, by showing your card first, is that you are god in actually? More insanity of humanity?
Belief in an invisible man-in-the-sky that controls everything, or any other type of deity, is part of what I call the “Insanity of Humanity”. Ironically, whether one believes in a god, or many gods, or none, it is only a belief. In order to “know” a god exists or does not exist, one would have to be god in actuality. Once you thoroughly examine Humanity, though, it makes more sense to me to believe that Man created a god (many of them throughout history) in his own image than the other way around. It is a tool people use to control other people.
“Gallup has released a new poll that shows that Americans still reject the concept of evolution of humans …” – JT
I wonder if that means they accept evolution of other species and/or the cosmos?
Pacman ate my comment.
This primarily as waste product of the evangelical movement
In the 1950 encyclical Humani generis, Pope Pius XII confirmed that there is no intrinsic conflict between Christianity and the theory of evolution, provided that Christians believe that the individual soul is a direct creation by God and not the product of purely material forces. Today, the Church supports theistic evolution(ism), also known as evolutionary creation,although Catholics are free not to believe in any part of evolutionary theory.
Guess this proves that around 42% of the population has yet to evolve.
“it is the impact of higher education that is particularly fascinating”
The impact of age cohort is also compelling: 28% of adults age 18-29 believe in a “Biblical” version of evolution, whereas 50% of those 65 and over do.
“in high school where 57% of students believe in the Old Testament version of human origin”
Apparently some percentage of law bloggers don’t know how to read simple statistical tables. What the report says is that 57% of adults aged 18 and older with less than a high school education believe that God created humans in their present form within the past 10,000 years. (It’s questionable whether that’s actually the “Old Testament version of human origin”.)
Perhaps the reason so many people are reluctant to accept the vast amount of “Scientific Evidence for Evolution is that there is no evidence.
Evidence is something which can be used to SCIENTIFICLY PROVE something.
We have fossils of Fish and we have fossils of salamanders but we have no(read that ZERO) fossils of any of the imagined species of transformation in between the two.
We have the bones of several different species of prehistoric ape but all we have to suggest that these are human ancestors is supposition and guess work.
What is so loosely called evidence is the imaginings of a mind; already convinced that evolution must be real because of their firm belief that creation in any form CAN not be true.
I don’t know. I freely admit that I don’t know what exact process brought man here.
I know what I believe but my beliefs are no more valid than yours because again; there is no evidence.
Any claim otherwise is simply placing way too much faith in science; which is after all; still evolving. LOL
It amazes me that after hundreds of years of scientists and the scientific method; demanding hard evidence; proof beyond a doubt; that we and scientists are so willing to accept what essentially amounts to a good story teller sitting down next to a pile of old trash and rubble and making up the story of how it came to be there.
Could be Evolution is real I suppose. It is a good story if nothing else but; hard evidence? No Not there.
We have a lot of evidence (hard fossil evidence) of Dinosaurs which were here before we were and while not as complete as we might wish; there is enough to prove they existed. But then no one is saying that Dinosaurs are direct human ancestors. I can accept a partial skeleton of a sixty foot long Dinosaur; fabricate what we think the missing pieces looked like based on ? Mostly guesswork but some science. I cannot however accept the scant fragments of skulls which are then fabricated the rest of the way to being called human or pre-human. Some of these skulls are as much as 80% fabrication. Some are more complete but there is no fossil record of one species “Evolving” into any other species. We just look at the world; say “Well, it couldn’t have been God” so “Hey it must have been “This way”.
Not good science my friends. Not good science at all. The exploration of Evolution as a theory of how we came to be is fine and dandy but to rule out all other possibilities in favor of legitimizing a pet theory is wrong and lacks Scientific Integrity.
Could be that the creation story is simply a simplified version of the story of how we came to be.
Could be that our desire to dissect the details of that story, has not been as productive as we believe it has been and all we have is our own imaginings.
Could be we humans think way too much of ourselves.
WAY
The way to see by Faith is to shut the Eye of Reason.
Benjamin Franklin
Personally, I believe in the Great Green Arkleseizure.
V838 Monocerotis Stellar Outburst Argument: Science or Supernatural
In 2002, Scientists detected what appears to be a stellar outburst from a pair of stars locked in a cosmic tryst within a shared veil of gas, a find that marks the first discovery of a long-sought type of space eruption.
The problem is in the gas cloud shape shifting events. 2005 and 2006 still photos at Hubble website shows something, NASA sees it, but won’t comment on.
I would sooner believe in the Heaven’s Gate nonsense that the Mothership trailed the Hale-Bopp Comet than believe in Creationism and yet Creationists no doubt regard the followers of Heaven’s Gate as wackos! Fact is, if one can believe in these delusions, one can believe in anything such as humans are not contributing to climate change and the academy of science is deliberating scamming the American people with their “findings.” Irrationality is the greatest obstacle to human progress.
It’s curious that what seems completely reasonable, accurate, sound, and rational to half of us, the other half, with similar information at hand, believe the exact opposite.
It is remarkable that so few believe in the science. Here’s my assumption; school districts are funded locally, for the most part, so they must adhere to the parent’s demands of avoiding the teaching of evolution (or other painful secular subjects such as geology, or God help us, man’s influence on climate!). Don’t pollute a young brain with science at such an early age! Once freed from the shackles of the conservative, parent driven drivel of the local school district, brains are allowed to expand in a post secondary environment. What’s the greatest fear of most religious fanatics? Secular education….