This will turn into a debate, I’m sure, so I posted it here. If the mods find it more appropriate for another forum, move it as you see fit.
http://news.excite.com/news/poll/
Today’s poll: IS EVOLUTION TRUE?
Evolution is winning, 48% to 45%.
How in the heck can it be only a 3% margin? Are people really that ignorant?
This is a self-determining sample, and therefore has virtually no statistical meaning. People who believe in creationist myths are more likely to answer such a poll; someone who believes in scientific fact is less likely to bother voting.
The easy answer is “yes,” I’m a cynic. You have to remember that these online polls have a highly skewed sample group; that is, the responses come from people motivated enough to respond on their own, instead of being a random survey. Generally, creationinsts tend to respond to these things so you’re going to have a large proportion of responses that support the Biblical fairy tale.
Second, the question wasn’t, “Is Evolution True?”; it was “Which of the following theories of man’s creation is closest to your views?” The way that a survey question is phrased can affect the nature of the responses.
Unfortunately, because most Americans are gullible rubes with only the faintest familiarity with the basics of biology and the scientific method, the imaginary sky god’s comforting fibs will usually win out over the examination of evidence in the clear light of reason.
I keep asking myself similar questions about another poll: the 2000 election. How in the heck can it be such a small margin? Are Americans really that ignorant?
“God created man in his own image.” Sure would explain a lot, eh?
Count yourself lucky that you didn’t tune in at 8am ET when the stats were approximately 65% to 35% in favor of evolution. The top of your head probably would have shot off. 
I was amazed at this result myself. I couldn’t figure out just what demographic the Excite homepage must appeal to in order to be yielding these sort of poll results. I’d like to think that the results are a fairly typical cross-section, because I don’t agree the case pointed out above where it was stated that the results were self-determining due to creationist being more likely to answer the poll. In my own case (and I’m making a WAG here that this applies to ther people), Excite is my homepage on my browser at work, and I answer the poll every day, regardless of the topic. It’s just a fun diversion while munch on my breakfast.
Now, faced with these particular poll results, I’m really hoping my assumptions above are wrong. <sigh>
Or maybe it’s just someone screwing around with the poll thingie. You know, just clicking on creation for the hell of it.
Not to belabor this Excite thing, but you have to have an Excite ID to vote in the polls. Once you’ve voted, it won’t let you vote again unless you sign out of Excite and log back in as another user. Unless people have dozens of Excite ID’s for fun, just so that they can vote repeatedly, I doubt multi-voting is an issue. 
On a more positive note, I just looked at the current results, and the percentages have shifted to 49% Evolution and 44% Creationism. <whew>
“You can walk like an ape, talk like an ape, and do what monkeys do/ God made Man, but a monkey supplied the goo.”
Devo, “Jocko Homo”
As in, if one of the answers is presupposed in the question, that might skew the results. Imagine if the question were phrased: “Which of the following theories of man’s evolution is closest to your views?”
Of course, it’s just a silly excite poll, not a conspiracy. Right?
Let’s be fair here…
I really don’t care if someone wanbts to believe that evolution did not happen. I don’t care if someone wants to believe that the world is a few thousand years old. Just as I don’t care if people choose to believe that crystals contain magic or that David B is really a devout Baptist who is just really good at playing devil’s advocate…
What I do care about is when these people want to teach Creatonism in public schools. WhatI care about is when they use BAD science to explain away GOOD science in the name of a God who doesn’t want them to lie, and have that go unchecked.
This poll doesn’t seem to do anything. As such, I have no quarrell with 'em.
Yer pal,
Satan
Satan,
I have to disagree with you about Creation being taught in school. I think you know the way I feel about it .
I think to be fair about it as you put it both should be taught. Because we really don’t know what the “GOOD” vs “BAD”(funny you used these words) science is until we die. So lets let the kids decide for themselves which one to believe in after they weigh both sides.
Flymaster,
Just one question about the poll question. Why did they put evolution first instead of creation? Last time I looked, “C” came before “E” in the alphabet. That didn’t make any sense to me. I am not saying that tarnished the survey but it did look odd.
This sounds like one of those poll questions where, say, 50% of respondents say that XYZ should be outlawed, and then 50% of those respondents then admit they didn’t know what XYZ was in the first place.
I’m not surprised by the results, however. I live in a town where it is closer to 90% who do not “believe” in evolution, erroneously thinking it is an alternate belief system. Technically, however, the question should be whether people consider evolution to be or not to be valid, and why, which might yield a much different result. It is a valid concept, by the way, and does not disprove the possibility of God.
I would that evolutionists keep in mind that Adam and Eve are historically valid, but as the first domesticated slaves in the colonial-method transition from hunting-gathering to ranching-farming (including the literalism of nakedness, shame, perceived sin, poverty, humans cursed to work their own former paradise by landlords, etc). I consider this important to reflect on daily because it wasn’t voluntary (it was inevitable, but harsh for them nevertheless). I am an atheist who disbelieves in transcendent spirit but fervently believes in aesthetic/historical consciousness.
Some of the symbolism of Eden is literary, of course, but on the other hand, we don’t have the first Sumerian tablets that probably recorded several versions of it, which would have been either more literal or more pagan-myth oriented. Christians should note that like Genesis, the ancient Greek myths of creation, (the basis of our western literary naturalism), Chronos, mist, chaos, etc, are all featured as first principle at some point. This literal “symbolism” cannot then easily be used to render evolution as invalid, nor has any scripture declared evolution a false concept, nor has any scripture declared that all stories be taken at face value, nor is anti-symbolism even remotely a Christian concept.
Not hardly Bill. You may judge who has the better metaphysical assumptions after death (if, of course, there is a you that survives death, which I doubt), but the better science, the only science in this debate, is evolution.
quote:
"Not to belabor this Excite thing, but you have to have an Excite ID to vote in the polls. Once you've voted, it won't let you vote again unless you sign out of Excite and log back in as another user. Unless people have dozens of Excite ID's for fun, just so that they can vote repeatedly, I doubt multi-voting is an issue. "
Please excuse my jerryrigged quote, as I am not sure how to do it properly.
I’d like to point out that this is in error. I do not have an excite ID, but I just voted in the poll. I didn’t try to skew the results, so I don’t know if it tracks IP addresses to prevent that.
Whatever your religeous affiliation, I still can’t believe that some people cling to personal beliefs even when they contradict scientific evidence. Granted, we constantly discover new evidence about how the universe works. But to deny evidence because you believe it goes against the “word of God” is just ignorant.
I have to disagree with you on this one. BAD science is science we know to be false because new evidence supports the Good science in ways that can’t be explained by the Bad science (we also call this a paradigm shift). Maybe we don’t have all the facts on evolution, but we do know Cretionism to be false, based on the research of anthropologists, physicists, archeologists, and any number of other scientists. We know that God did not just wink everything into existance in seven days. It might be interesting to mention in class, much in the same way we mention people once thought the world was flat, but we shouldn’t teach it as scientific fact.
Creationism is a Christian belief anyway and has no place in public school since the Constitution requires the separatation of church and state.
This is a ludicrous position. We should only teach our children what we deem to be “good” science, and how to apply critical thinking skills. We should NOT teach them both “good” and “bad” science, then say “we don’t really know what to think, so you decide”.
Using your approach, we would teach them that “diseases can be caused by bacteria and viruses”, but also “diseases can be caused by demons and witches”. Hey, you decide.
Or perhaps, “the earth is round”, but also “the earth is flat, and it is supported by turtles all the way down”. Silly kids, you figure it out.
Maybe “lightning is the result of cloud ionization”, or “lightning is ejected from Zeus’ arse”. Could be either one.
Let the children learn comparative creation myths in a religion or mythology class, or even in a church. If they choose to discard rationality and dismiss science altogether, well perhaps you can gather with one another on Sundays and laugh at all the stupid scientists.
they were either brainwashed into being stupid or they worked at it. god only wants dumb people in heaven.
Dal Timgar
WB: Because we really don’t know what the “GOOD” vs “BAD”(funny you used these words) science is until we die.
Not just to add to the chorus of disagreement here, but to make one important point: Bill, to say (correctly, btw) that evolution is “good” science and creationism is “bad” science is NOT the same thing as to say that evolution is “right” and creationism is “wrong”.
See, creationism is a religious belief, not a scientific theory. As such, it may perfectly well turn out to be absolutely true even though all the scientific evidence points the other way. God could easily have created the earth and its inhabitants exactly and literally as stated in Genesis, and just thrown in all the evidence that supports modern biological and geological theories, for reasons of His own. So the theory of evolution can indeed be impeccably good science and still turn out to be ultimately wrong, and as you note, we won’t know until we die (if then).
But this does not change the fact that evolution is still good science, because it agrees with the factual material evidence, and creationism is bad science, because it doesn’t agree with that evidence. And the whole point of science education is to learn about scientific facts and evidence and how they are used to develop and test scientific theories. Even if God turns out to be just kidding us with fake physical evidence and evolution is completely wrong, it is still good science and belongs in science class. Even if after-death revelations turn out to convince us all—even Satan and David B! ;)—that God faked the facts and creationism is completely right, it is still bad science and doesn’t belong in science class. Do you understand how the difference between science and religious belief requires us to hold fast to this principle, even though at first glance it may seem to you prejudiced and unfair?
?! On what do you base this assumption?