If you’d asked my religious* high school teachers that question (and I did :)), I think they would have objected that the question is ambiguous because the truth is not one or the other, but both - evolution is the means, god is the reason. If pressed for a yes/no they might have answered either way depending on how they chose to interpret the ambiguity. But a “no” answer wouldn’t indicate that they believe evolution to be incorrect.
If you’d asked in a science class, you’d have been told to hold the question for your next religion class.
I’m Australian, my ex-next door neighbour is a YEC. I knew she was religious, but I was taken aback to find one of them in my own backyard (at times, literally so
This sounds like what are often called Young Earth Creationists. The Wikipedia article on YEC (which is currently flagged for quality issues) states that “Between 40-50% of adults in the United States say they believe in YEC, depending on the poll. According to a Gallup poll in December 2010, around 40% of Americans believe in YEC”—yet, when I checked on the the link they use as a reference, it turns out that poll was about belief in the creation of human beings specifically, and not the creation of the world in general (which some of the 40% may well believe is much older).
I think that clip from Dayton raises some pretty huge questions. For one, where was that science teacher educated, and from where did he receive his teaching certification? (Not trying to mock or denigrate - I think this is important) Was he certified by a college/university that teaches a creationist science curriculum? If so, should universities like that be allowed to certify public school science teachers, if the law requires that evolution by taught? Also, assuming that Tennessee has standardized tests for science, how do they ask questions about things like evolution?
Not claiming to have any of the answers here, but I’d like to hear everyone’s thoughts. I’m a pretty much entirely non-religious person, but at one point I had to teach the seven days of creation as part of an English program working for Canadian missionaries, and the explanation that was offered for the young Earth (boy, that’s a yarn I oughtta spin for you all sometime) would be cringeworthy to even the most tolerant of people.
I discovered recently than my Australian cousin is a firm creationist- she’s a rheumatologist nurse, I think, so you’d expect her to be reasonably well educated, but her comment on the subject of evolution still gets me; ‘Cats are cats, and dogs are dogs, one’s never going to turn into the other!’ delivered with a little laugh and a pitying look.
My brother-in-law (also in Australia, as am I) is a YEC. I think it’s a function of which particular denomination a person belongs so. B-i-L is a pentecostal pastor and I think it’s practically compulsory for those in his church.
We were having a discussion during one of his rare visits and the age of the earth came up (I have no idea how). Shaun (b-i-l) made a remark about Adam, the age of the earth etc etc and my husband thought a huge joke was being made. YECism isn’t rife here but it is around - just most people who think that way don’t make a big public deal of it.
Yikes, Australia! I have to say that IME religiosity here is very low key, to the point where it seems to be seriously dying out. But there will always be a rearguard action about these things, and there is a minority of small congregations that essentially are intellectual franchises of the YEC movement, so far as the style of proselytising and the general feel goes.
That said, it seems that this Wikireference seems to suggest that the intellectual traffic may be the other way - (scroll down to Australia). The references to Queensland seem to overstate the position in favour of YECs, so I suspect the entry may be tendentious.
In general, the tendency of these people to witness (on street corners and the like) can create an impression that their numbers are greater than they really are.
