P.S. I llke to think of myself as at least a little brighter than a shit sandwich.
One key difference, though, is Catholicism, which has no problem with evolution (generally). Only 25% of Americans are Catholic, although it’s sad how many of them are creationists.
Exactly.
I am not a professional statistical poll writer. But I do know that exactly and precisely how you word your questions makes a lot more difference in the outcome than any other single factor in the matter of who answers your poll, and what they agree with.
I will admit that if your questions are poorly written, my sieve for true/false will become extremely narrow, and exacting, eventually leading to me answering almost all your questions as false. Of course, mostly, I won’t answer polls at all, since I know that almost none of them really seek information, but rather seek confirmation of their authors biases. That is trivial to obtain, and certainly not in need of my input.
Tris
I thought it was common knowledge that the pollster controls the results of his poll?
There are lots of polls that pretty much show this same result. Whether it’s 45%, 40% or 50% isn’t really a big deal-- the numbers are astonishingly high, for a 1st world country.
I don’t think it’s science classes, it’s US religion. As **thelurkinghorror **says there is not, worldwide, a close correlation between acceptance of evolution and religion.
Religions are only in small part sets of superstitions. Mostly they are cultures and power structures. US fundie religion and its leaders are fighting a cultural war against science (particularly science relating to Big Philisophical Questions, like origins of life and the universe). It is about having or not having the lead role in people’s overall worldview.
There is no inherent logical or factual contradiction between evolution and the big bang on the one hand and many religions. Religious teachings often don’t actually describe the mechanism of how their god or gods are supposed to have created the universe or life (the Abrahamic religions don’t for example). So you can mesh them with evolution and the big bang simply by saying they are the mechanism by which one’s particular god did it.
The problem for religions though is the more you start thinking about finding answers to questions using scientific enquiry, the less the tendency is likely to be to seek answers from religion and religious leaders. It’s a different worldview. It doesn’t absolutely have to be as a matter of logic, but it’s where the path tends to take you.
US fundie religion is not against evolution because it contradicts their religion, they are against it because science is not of their culture. And that extends to all science to a degree but most particularly to science that goes to deep understanding of what has traditionally been the religious preserve. That’s why they are against the big bang and stem cell research and evolution and so on.
Obviously religion plays a huge role, but I wonder what role American exceptionalism plays. I think in the US we are encouraged to believe in arrogant delusions.
We have the best health care system in the world
No other country on earth has civil or political rights like we do
We played a central role in winning WW2 and beating the Germans (the Russians actually did most of the fighting)
etc.
I don’t know though. But it seems in the US (speaking as a person who has never traveled internationally, so I don’t know for sure) we are encouraged to believe in lies, just so long as those lies tell us what we want to hear. It saturates our politics. Maybe inhabitants of other countries are more humble, and willing to accept painful truths (for many the fact of evolution can be painful at first, since there is no god watching out for us and no divine plan). But in the US we generally are not.
I should have said in my second para “Organised religions are only in small part sets of superstitions.”
Well, given my age (58), I can remember a time when people were interested in education. Way back in October, 1957 there was a country called the USSR (aka Russia) that launched the first satellite into orbit around the Earth. What, … America wasn’t first? :eek: NO !!!
Needles to say the general population of the USA was scared shitless that Russia was way ahead of us technologically and Americans had better start thinking seriously about how their youngsters were being taught, particularly in math and science. Being in the second grade at the time, I’d say my K-12 education was pretty good. (Yes college was pretty good too but that is not part of the public educational experience). At no point during that time, did I hear anyone screaming that our students had to be taught creationism, intelligent design or that a superhuman entity brought about the inception of the Universe in less than a week. :mad:
So, as the decades passed, Russia grew weaker and dissolved, and Americans realized that we could afford to become stupid once again and needn’t have none of that book-learnin’ no more.
When, the US was attacked on Sept 11, 2001, I thought the reaction was going to be similar to Oct 1957 or maybe even Dec 7, 1941. Well. I guess not.
I think it is a sign of the new stupidity that in 2008 when there were 9 Republican Presidential candidates debating, and when asked if they didn’t believe in evolution, 3 raised their hands. :mad: I wonder what would have happened if those candidates gave the same answer a week after Sputnik was launched.
So, I am wondering what the fuck is happening to this country.
Thank you for listening to this grumpy old man complain about things today.
EDIT - Wesley Clark made a good point. And when you’re arrogant delusions are totally blown apart - by Sputnik for example - then you have to face the truth.
But…but…there was RACISM then!!! Don’t you understand?
Book learnin’ had to be fucked up in order to eliminate racism.
You must not have been paying attention. There are tons of threads around here (mostly with my name high in the post count list ;)) explaining why single-parent homes and drug use and crime and promiscuity and STDs and poor literacy rates and the creation of a crass and vulgar society have all been necessary in order to eliminate racism.
I’ll be glad when racism is well and truly dead in this country so we can get back to having adults run things again. 
How is not wanting the USSR to “win” the space race related in any way to racism?
Flight of ideas, much?
IMO, education is not valued in this country and hasn’t been for some time. We pay lip service as a society to improving our schools etc, but there is a strong anti-intellectual streak present. It’s sad and does us no good for the future. Hell, college freshmen can’t even write decent essays, never mind thinking critically… But that’s another soap box for another day.
WOW - mighty impressed with ourselves, aren’t we?
“Ooo, look at us - we’re to good to wipe our ass with our hands!”
“Sleep with our cousins? - NEVER!”
Damn intellectual elite
Bullfuckingshit. (Just doing my part in the fight against racism! :rolleyes:)
There are tons of threads around here (mostly with your name high in the post count list) in which posters;
1 Question if there’s is any correlation to your perceived causation (or is it causation to your perceived correlation … actually, I think it’s both).
Q Challenge your perception that those things have in fact increased (with cites, that you find any reason you can to reject).
% Reject your perception but take the position that even if your perception is correct, the price was worth it. (Which you then, later, misrepresent as “explaining the necessity of …”. See above.)
But please continue to misrepresent the actual positions of the majority of those that disagree with you, it’s [del]awuseing[/del]* amusing.
(*Hmm FF’s spell-checker wants that to be nauseating, maybe it’s on to something).
CMC fnord!
Anyway, I’ve come to feel that you’re {Harborwolf} one of the good guys on the other side. Several of you I tussled with have become people I respect. FinnAgain, GIGObuster and crowmanyclouds are some of the others. - Starving Artist
You think 6 out of 9 Republican Presidential candidates *would *have said they believed in evolution back in 1957!?
Eyebrows of Doom
Thinking back to 1957, I’d say they ALL would have said they believed in evolution. If they started complaining about all the Godless scientifical stuff, people would have said they were Communists.
Personally, I think they would have been booed off the stage.
Now, it’s hip to be stupid.
You got that backwards. Even back then the word was that “Godless Commies” were on a mission to destroy the Rightous God Frearin’ USA and by the Lords Grace we would prevail against the Red Hoard.
BTW - I’m remembering this from my older relatives rantings so if I’ve left anything out I appologize.
In 1925, there was a large creationist movement, as evidenced by the Scopes trial. What do you think are the odds that this disappeared by 1957, and then suddenly came back in modern days.
I think what you’re thinking of is the National Defense Education Act, which encouraged evolution teaching. Note that this does not imply that people were any more accepting of evolution, only that the government thought it prudent to teach.
Well I must admit that growing up (and still living) in the Boston area may have kept me far removed from the creationist movement. Plus, when I was young, John Kennedy was President and you never heard him spouting that creationist crap.
What really surprised me was around the early 1980’s my father was listening to Paul Harvey (I never could stand the guy) and good old Paul was lauding the fact that some dipshit town in Dipshit, USA had ruled that evolution could not be taught as the only explanation for how humans came about. :mad: I thought that shit was killed off in the Scopes Trial.
In my Freshman Speech class my first year in college a Young Earth Creationist stood up and gave his three three facts proving the Earth was young, I still remember them:
1.) Before landing on the Moon scientists calculated the age of the Moon and predicted 6 feet of moon dust, turns out there was only an inch or so.
2.) Because of exponential growth the human population would be astronomical now if there were humans earlier than 6 thousand years ago.
3.) The Great Barrier Reef has a predictable growth rate and no scientist will claim it’s older than 10,000 years.
#3 is my favorite, please Dope don’t waste a minute refuting any of these ‘proofs’, it is beneath you all.
Define “belief”. I believe in the Big Bang Theory because the majority of physicists say this is how the Universe came into existence, and I’ve studied a little bit of cosmology myself to understand some of their reasoning. But if 20 years from now a better theory is developed and the consensus is that the Big Bang Theory was bullshit, then what? Am I supposed to just change my belief just like that? Of course I would, because I base my beliefs in evidence and proof, but I think a lot of people conflate belief with faith. This is true in regards to religion, politics, etc. People just can’t accept the fact that they were wrong.