Gallup: Most Americans Did Not Evolve


On Friday, Gallup published the results of a poll which probed American opinions on the origins of the human species. The results: 46% of Americans believe in straight-up creationism, 32% believe in so-called "intelligent design," and a mere 15% believe humans evolved via natural selection.

Gallup conducted the poll with a random sample of 1,012 Americans. The demographic breakdown for responders was neatly summarized at

Nearly 70% of respondents who attend church every week said that God created humans in their present form, compared with 25% of people who seldom or never attend church.

Among the seldom church-goers, 38% believe that humans evolved with no guidance from God.

The numbers also showed a tendency to follow party lines, with nearly 60% of Republicans identifying as creationists, while 41% of Democrats hold the same beliefs.

Republicans also seem to be more black-and-white about their beliefs, with only 5% responding that humans evolved with some help from God. That number is much lower than the 19% of both independents and Democrats.

Over at Gallup, a helpful chart shows the evolution of Americans' opinions on evolution over the last 30 years. It's not pretty. Very little has changed since 1982, when 44% of Americans were creationists, 38% believed in "intelligent design," and 9% came out for natural selection.

Lest you think the Gallup results are mistaken, take a quick peek at the comments section over at CNN's coverage of the poll. It's a proud and appalling parade of ignorance.


  1. Fulton says

    I respect Gallup and their history of polling, but 1000 people is a rather small sample, 600 of whom were reach via land line. I encourage more study.

  2. Steve says

    Nah, this numbers are fairly accurate. Other polls come to the roughly the same numbers. It’s an embarrassment beyond description. Most Americans are simply terminally stupid.

  3. Johnson says

    It is worth remembering that without the stupid and the ignorant, we could not enjoy the profound as there’d be no basis for comparison.

    That’s what gets me through the day.

  4. Dale says

    It’s a rightwing concept that you can vote (or have a majority rule) on what the truth is.

    Fulton, an 1,000 sample for a national study has always been the norm for pollsters. But I do agree with you, more people should be included. And since many people under 30 have ditched the landline, pollsters may have to consider other means to get a real cross-section snapshot of this country.

  5. says

    Ha ha ha ; this does not look well for the ‘design of intelligent Americans’, whatever about “intelligent design”. It’s so funny.

    But this confirms everything we have always known; religion is a lethal poison ……to knowledge, science and the advancement of civilization.

    But Galileo told us that many centuries ago.

  6. DannyEastVillage says

    So the people who don’t go to church aren’t anti-intellectual, anti-scientific or ignorant. Tell us something we didn’t already know.

    Now. Having said that, I have to out myself: I am an Anglican Christian. My tradition has no argument with learning, education or scientific truth and inquiry. We do not believe you have to make yourself stupid to be a believer.

    However, classic American religion has, unfortunately, been a a stronghold of resisting learning, science and social change. American religionists still periodically conduct book burnings. Last week one of those snake-handling imbeciles died of a rattlesnake bite because he believed in his bible.

    Europeans washed their hands of the influence of the debilitating influence of the priests a long time ago–and as a result their societies have moved forward impressively–particularly since WWII. They have made laws that benefit the entire society, making their societies more just, healthy and happy.

    The extrapolation to make is obvious: keep the priests out of public life and everyone will enjoy a better, healthier lifestyle.

  7. Hue-Man says

    Just give it time. Wiki says that the Galileo business started in 1610 and the catholic church – that bastion of truth, dignity, and light – apologized for persecuting him….in 2000! In the meantime, maybe one of the 90% could explain to be who it was that created god.

  8. Cfox says

    And public school teachers want higher pay!
    If they did even half of the job that teachers did 50 years ago, these numbers would be significantly different. Instead, they learn how to teach in college, but never learn any substantive information. It is time to just kill all schools of education and make people actually learn something in order to graduate from college.

  9. mike/ says

    the only thing this Gallup poll proves is that Neanderthals never became extinct.

    they are all around us…

  10. Jake says

    Of those that beleive in intelligent design/church goers, curious how many of them beleive Jesus was a blue eyed, brown haired caucasion.

  11. Dan says

    Evolution is not a matter of scientific debate. Check out this video on the genetic proof for it here:

    It just utterly demolishes the idea that evolution didn’t happen.

  12. Mike in the Tundra says

    @Cfox – actually teachers do not decide what to teach. They are told what to teach by school boards and the state and local governments. My husband and I often attended school board meetings, and we found them appalling. Michelle Bachmann started her political career as a school board member.

  13. says

    The Republicans in Arizona have been gutting public education, trying to force parents to put their kids in religious schools.

  14. RWG says

    Ah, America! You had a great run, but now it’s over. A once great nation fades to obscurity through stupidity, willful ignorance and unbridled greed. We’ll miss you.

  15. says

    It seems to me that the 32% probably includes a lot of people who are merely trying to reconcile a belief in evolution with a belief in god. That means that 47% or people believe in evolution. 47/46 is still upset tingly close, but I don’t think the reality is as bleak as you make it out to be.

  16. says

    What amazing me most about the survey is how so many can be so incredibly stupid. That’s that religion does to you.

  17. Mickey says

    This just confirms what we already know: Most Americans are mentally challenged.

  18. Swiminbuff says

    The poll says a lot about the American education system. I wonder how many of the respondents were home schooled or educated in religious schools.
    How do these people fare when they go to university? I suppose they must take courses other than science.

  19. Swiminbuff says

    They should do another poll.
    How many Americans believe the earth is flat?
    How many Americans believe the sun revolves around the earth?
    How many Americans believe man ever walked on the moon?
    How many Americans can actually find USA on a map of the world?
    How many Americans know who the first president of the USA was?
    How many Americans know which country they fought for independence?
    How many Americans believe Elvis is still alive?
    How many Americans can name the original 13 states? How about all 50 states?
    I wonder how many native born Americans could actually pass their own citizenship test if they had to.

  20. Joey says

    What is fascinating is that while evolution is real the cause of it is not so obvious. Why did it start? Survival of the fittest, the need for DNA to replicate itself? Then why are we gay? I sure don’t plan on reproducing. Science is great at explaining effects but not the underlying cause. They have no clue as to why things like entanglement happen on the sub-atomic level. Or answering the question what is consciousness? There are so many questions maybe we need a new way of looking at our universe.

  21. Graphicjack says

    I guess none of all y’all Umericans read “Inheret the Wind”, huh? It is amazing how religion can take otherwise rational people and turn them into completely ignorant people. They believe in fables like Noah, Adam
    and Eve and Sodom and Gomorrah (which they falsely attribute and interpret as anti-gay) which no one has ever been able to prove, but they disbelieve in evolution, global warming, and that gays are part of our natural selection, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Sad.

  22. Rick says

    “Europeans washed their hands of the influence of the debilitating influence of the priests a long time ago–and as a result their societies have moved forward impressively–particularly since WWII”

    Ha! Europe is on the verge of total economic collapse. And they are driving themselves to extinction with their low birth rates–which is due, in part, to the collapse of religion.

    We should not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Religion is not inherently bad and the entire fabric of Western civilization was built around Judeo-Christian ethical values.

    It is the loss of many of those values that has thrown the West into such a tailspin.

    I am skeptical of this poll, simply because it forces the respondent to make a black-and-white either/or choice. I mean are “intelligent design” and a belief in evolution mutually exclusive? Not in my understanding of the term.

    I also don’t see that a belief that God created humans in their current form is necessarily incompatible with a belief in evolution–it depends on how you look at it.

    For example, God could have created humans in their current form via intelligent design that took the form of evolution.

    But the way the question is asked does not allow for such nuance.

  23. JJ says

    @Joey, the difference between Science and Creationism is that Science embraces the fact that there are things we don’t yet know. Creationism won’t tolerate any uncertainty and rushes to explain the unknown as acts of god(s).

    “Science is great at explaining effects but not the underlying cause.”

    No, Science is the process of observing effects and then working out their cause. We know how well we’ve explained the cause by how well we can predict the effects. There are countless examples of this. For instance, the invention of the microscope led to the discovery of microorganisms, which led to the Germ Theory of disease, which explained infection, which led us to predict that antiseptics would enable surgery, which worked.

    The fact that we don’t yet know everything doesn’t mean that Science has failed. Rather, the fact that we’ve explained so much in just the last few centuries that was unexplained (i.e., unpredictable) for countless millennia means the Science is in the process of working.

  24. Q says

    I agree with @Thomas. I suspect that these polls are very dependent on how the question is asked. For example, I bet there are many religious people who would say “yes” to the question about whether God created humans in their present form, but who also believe in evolution and don’t take Genesis as the literal truth. It all depends on what you mean by “create”.

  25. Rob says

    What’s great about this is that I know clearly how much more evolved I am than others in my own country.

  26. Rob says

    And yeah, CFox clearly has no experience working with a school system. I have a few friends that are teachers, one specifically who teaches biology. They have to present the “hypothesis” of evolution and the kids can choose what to believe. She even noted how many students are clearly trying to trap her with questions, likely from the parents prodding. It’s really ridiculous.

    That’s why you have to applaud the students that then have the freedom to stand up and say, “No, it’s true. Your belief that we were made this way is bull and your parents are just stupid.”

  27. gomez says

    @gfox. by your mischief-making libertarian/market anarchism philosophy, all public schools would be shut down so kids would be educated by exactly this kind of rock-stupid majoritarianism via private enterprise schools catering to the masses’ anti-intellectualism and superstitions

  28. JJ says

    @Joey, to your question of how can being gay be an evolutionary advantage…when some members of the tribe aren’t burdened with children of their own, they have that much more freedom to contribute in other ways to everyone’s survival. Hunting and gathering, defending, toolmaking, inventing, raising the orphans of parents who don’t survive, etc. As long as their contributions exceed the cost of rearing them and the loss of their reproduction, they will put the tribe at an advantage.

  29. says

    that’s embarrassing. it’s nt even a case of “different opinions” it’s a case of willful ignorance and people choosing to be empirically-wrong because it’s easier to be stupid than intelligent and critical.

    remember this Jan Hooks classic? it fits.

  30. Randy says

    Someone needs to challenge these folks where “God guiding” fits into biological evolution. There is no point in the process where any supernatural being can “guide” it.

  31. Michaelandfred says

    While watching the Republican debates there were several times I questioned the idea of evolution…. (there but for the grace of a million years, go I)

  32. says

    This is the saddist news I’ve heard in years. All my hope is dashed. The majority of my countrymen have surrendered their minds to a primitive nightmare that infects the intellect like a cancer. If the attack of the mushroom people were non-fiction it would be less tragic than this epidemic addiction to drivel.

  33. disgusted american says

    This just proves what Stupid Dumbasses Americans are…Greedy,selfish,Morons

  34. disgusted american says

    This just proves what Stupid Dumbasses Americans are…Greedy,selfish,Morons

  35. disgusted american says

    This just proves what Stupid Dumbasses Americans are…Greedy,selfish,Morons

  36. disgusted american says

    This just proves what Stupid Dumbasses Americans are…Greedy,selfish,Morons

  37. JJ says

    This tells us a lot about who answers land lines at the time of day that pollsters call.

  38. Jimcracky says

    If I’m the product of intelligent design how come it’s a sin to masturbate? My arms end there and my hands fit. Just sayin…

  39. Randy says

    The dumbing of America! The more that I am around people, the more I find that American’s really are ignorant and lazy!

  40. westcoast88 says

    This country is so stupid. Which is why most of them will vote against their own interests and elect President Romney.

  41. Jose S says

    People have different opinions on how humans were created. I have many theories (none of them involve christian creationism).

    I *believe* that there was some intelligence behind our genetic manipulation. Maybe we were humanoids who evolved through time and then something or someone intervened.

    The thing is we don’t know for sure since human evolution theory cannot explain how humans became hairless, intelligent and started walking upright. There is still no proof that humans actually evolved the way some scientists *claim* we evolved or how we evolved. Many other animals have existed for millions of years and yet have not been able to ‘evolve’ into an intelligent, sophisticated, fully conscious species like ours. We are the only ‘animals’ on earth that create art, culture, music, philosophy and technology.

    I am trying to keep an open mind here. Because your mind works like a parachute, it works best when its open.

    Sorry Brandon, but here is where I disagree.

  42. Joey says

    thanks JJ but I still think you miss the point. Science is a set of tools sometimes those tools are very effective. Science since Newton has become the study of forces. But it doesn’t explain why things are, just how they work. The lens of the microscope did open up a whole new reality for man. But Science is just one lens (3rd person objective reality) if we only look through that one lens then we miss other realities. We cannot understand love with a microscope. We cannot understand who we are with a genetic test.

    I am suggesting that science is a great tool but to believe that the scientific method is the answer to all questions is to me like saying religion is. I don’t accept on faith that science has all the answers. It is like saying some version of God does.

    I think you, like others are making up explanations to fit with the common genetic theory. You have no proof why gay is a valid experience or what it’s benefits are. To believe only in outward proof is as limiting as any other thought system man has devised.

    I know I am gay because I know it. I don’t need to prove it. In science you would say he is gay because he has sex with people of his own gender. But why do I do it? If you are going to tell me consciousness is just an illusion and that my gayness is just a product of my genes and experiences with no free will then I will never believe you. I know what I am. Being gay was the gift that helped me realize that. Thank you for your comments.

  43. lessthan says

    Hi Brandon! Your summary is incorrect. God-guided evolution is theistic evolution, while intelligent design denies evolution outright.
    Basically, if you want to believe in God and evolution, you have to believe in some form of theistic evolution. Intelligent design is the idea that everything in its current form was placed here. Any other interpretation of intelligent design is misinterpretation or a deception.

  44. fedorajoe says

    I think the poll makes the situation look worse than it is.

    I admit that anecdotes are proof of nothing, but even so: I live in a very traditional section of America, and most people I have known have believed in God, but most of them have also believed in evolution.

    The poll creates an either/or dilemma that doesn’t actually exist. I’m an atheist, but prior to that, I was a Christian who had no doubt whatsoever that evolution was a reality of the natural world. I suspect that many of the people who answered the poll question “badly” are coming from the same place.

  45. says

    Aaaaand it shows. Just look at some of the comments about evolution and science here in this very board, which I have always assumed contained higher average intelligence than the general population. Frightening lack of understanding about the theory of evolution, for example. And people not even knowing what intelligent design actually is, but talking like they are experts in the field. Hubris and a little knowledge are very dangerous things when combined.

  46. KP says

    I agree with FedoraJoe – the poll is less scarier than it sounds. For those who believe in God, any God, they also have to believe God set in motion evolution. For people to believe evolution is the only theory, they also have to not believe in God essentially. Many people would rather believe that God set in motion evolution than to believe there isn’t a God at all. Its hard for them to reconcile the two believes so they don’t. They continue to believe both in God and in evolution. The Creationist people are just delusional but what else is new.

  47. GregV says

    @Joey: It’s really very easy to explain how more gay people can equal an evolutionary advantage.
    Have you ever noticed that the societies of the world that have the lowest birth rates also have the highest standard of living and the longest life expectancies, while those with the highest birth rates have the worst health and the most misery? Have you noticed how China went from poverty to a booming economy when they restricted their citizens to parenting no more than one child?
    Gay couples have natural birth control implicit in their relationship. They only have children when those children are wanted and generally when a decent lifestyle for them can be afforded. Heterosexual couples may or may not have or choose this “evolutionary advantage,” but hundreds of millions of them do not and, therefore, end up with ten “accidental” kids when they do not have the time, energy, knowledge or money to afford a healthy lifestyle for even one of them.

    Look at a beehive and you see a “society” in which a small number give birth while a large number tend to the bee society’s needs to keep the hive healthy and prosperous.
    Imagine if we were to genetically re-engineer the bees’ genes so that their numbers would exponentially multiply in number as fast as humans have multiplied over the past two centuries, without allowing for enough bees to keep the other needs of society going. They might easily go extinct.
    I sometimes think that if humans ever find out how to change genes to ensure that babies are born gay or straight, a hundred years from now, there might conceivably be support for the idea of making sure MOST people are gay so that humanity could continue to thrive rather than extinguish itself through the population explosion that is well underway now.

  48. Charcus says

    Unbelievable, nearly half of you guys believe god waved a magic wand like some harry potter in the sky 😉

    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.

  49. says

    Well, using the descriptives “straight up” and “so-called” tells me where Brandon stands on the subject.

    It’s not a sign of weakness to believe in a greater power. Unless, of course, you can explain to me- in detail- every last minutia of the universe, covering every dimension, both known and unknown. Which, by definition, you can’t.

  50. screech says

    I explained the concept of evolution to my 9 & 10 year old nieces in 10 minutes and in a comprehensible way. If they can understand that there is no intelligence in design, or, if they can see the difference between top-down and bottom-up design, then all I can say is that this is an indictment of the American educational system. My nieces are not Einsteins, but typical little girls.

    Invest in education!

  51. JJ says

    @Rodney, if no one answers your challenge, it does not then follow that there exists a greater power. But let’s assume for a moment that there is one. Who created it, when, and why? It seems just one greater power isn’t enough. We need at least two. One to explain our existence and one to explain the existence of the one that explains us. Then of course you need one to explain the second and another to explain that one…and it’s elephants all the way down, as they say.

    So you see, appealing to a greater power does not actually solve the problem of explaining “every last minutia of the universe.” There’s always one question left: who created the highest of the higher powers? So one wonders, why appeal to a greater power at all if it doesn’t provide any useful insight into the gaps in our knowledge, and it doesn’t even fill in all the gaps? Wasn’t that the whole point of inventing the greater power to begin with?

    This is a great example that while believing in a greater power may not be a sign of “weakness,” it is a sign of flawed reasoning.

  52. Dave says

    Most Americas are uneducated and illiterate and believe anything they are told. They want to keep them this way so they can keep them down and in fear and under their control.

  53. JJ says

    I’m not sure what you mean by “linear” time, but I’ll take it to mean the idea that the flow of cause and effect is a fundamental property of the universe. If we instead assume that causation is an emergent property of the universe (stemming from the interaction of more fundamental properties) or that causation is illusory (an artifact of how the brain works), then the question of a greater power is easily resolved. If we start from the premise that causation is not fundamental, then the question of what caused the universe never arises. There is no cause and therefore no need to invoke a greater power to supply one.

  54. darkmoonman says

    North and South Carolina both serve as proof that at least some American’s haven’t evolved mentally past the stone age.

  55. Tarc says

    With a 94% scientific illiteracy rate, is it any wonder? The Republicans have done a great job at keeping the sheeple dumb, ignorant, and easily managed.

  56. andrew says

    Why is it that religious fundamentalism is still fairly strong in the USA, when our European brothers and sisters have decades ago assigned it to the trash bin of history?

  57. andrew says

    To put out a positive vibe, it is getting better in some segments of our society. When I was a kid growing up in “Catholic” America about 75% of Catholics went to Mass every sunday. Today that number is about 30%. It does get better!

  58. andrew says

    Grow up people. The billion gallaxy universe, if it has a creator, it is certainly not the silly and wicked little man made god of the bible.

  59. TheKingInYellow says

    Absolutely appalling how your all behaving. You commenters (most of you) laughing about someone else’s beliefs? So much for enlightened atheists or agnostics.

    I’m Greek Orthodox, I believe we were created, I think public schools in the USA are awful (for different reasons), I was home schooled, I am not going to waste my life paying for a useless collage degree in the USA (I’m an apprentice Industrial Electrician).

    @Dan: About the Ken Miller video. While that evidence is highly in favor of evolution, the whole of creation is not in favor of the theory of evolution. The universe needs a beginning. The universe cannot have created itself, and basic physics knowledge rejects the idea that the universe has always existed. Life needed to come from nonliving matter. Entropy needs to be suspended and reversed for evolution to occur. And on and on, the reasons against evolution are greater then the reasons for it! Why should I put my faith or belief or reasoning to the dice? Most rational and logical people do not gamble their money away on the slots. Why should anyone believe that we are the “Jackpot” ?

    Evolution requires non-living matter to turn into a living organism and this has never been observed. When it comes to real science (i.e. things we can actually establish by observation and experiment) life always comes from life! Evolutionists insist life came from nonliving matter but they have no way of proving this.

    Complex systems do NOT evolve bit by bit. For example the Eye.
    Darwin said: “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”

    No mechanism has been put forward that even begins to explain how something like the human eye could have been produced by time, chance, natural selection and mutation. And saying that it exists now therefore must have evolved somehow does not prove evolution either.

    If evolution was true, there should be large numbers of intermediate fossil organisms present in the fossil record. Despite over a hundred years of intensive world wide research into the fossil record, the ‘missing links’ are still well and truly ‘missing’.

    Probability facts are also contrary to evolution.
    Evolutionists such as Sir Fred Hoyle concede this when they say “The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way (time and chance) is comparable with the chance that ‘a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.'”

    The probability of even one single protein molecule consisting of 200 amino acids arising spontaneously by chance is 1 in 10 raised to power of 260. This is calculated by raising 20 (the number of different types amino acids available) to the power of 200 (the number of amino acids in the protein chain). Even if the whole universe was packed with amino acids combining frantically for billions of years, it would not produce even one such protein molecule let alone produce a living cell.

    Then there is the issue of the rest of the universe needing to exist first.

    Dr. John Lennox (Professor in Mathematics at Oxford University) says; “If I say “X creates X,” I presuppose the existence of X in order to account for the existence of X. To presuppose the existence of the universe to account for its existence is logically incoherent.” (this quote is in response to Dr. Steven Hawking’s statement that the universe could create itself). ex nihilo nihil fit (latin, from nothing, nothing comes)

    The First Law of Thermodynamics says that there is only a finite amount of energy and the Second Law says that the amount of available energy is continually decreasing. If the universe had existed forever, all the available existing energy would have already been used up.

    Leaving the only logical conclusion that the universe had a definite beginning. (if not a creator/God it required some outside influence of some kind that would drive the universe to it’s present state without decaying into non-viable form)

    World-renowned evolutionist Isaac Asimov when discussing the Second Law of Thermodynamics said:
    “Another way of stating the second law then is: ‘The universe is constantly getting more disorderly!'” Viewed that way we can see the second law all about us. We have to work hard to straighten a room, but left to itself it becomes a mess again very quickly and very easily. Even if we never enter it, it becomes dusty and musty. How difficult to maintain houses, and machinery, and our own bodies in perfect working order: how easy to let them deteriorate. In fact, all we have to do is nothing, and everything deteriorates, collapses, breaks down, wears out, all by itself – and that is what the second law is all about.

    How then should evolution work? How would any progress be made without some driving force behind it all? Once set in motion with a source of energy any process can happen, even evolution, but to suggest that our universe spawned from nothingness and chaos is laughable.

    Spend your time bettering yourselves, contributing to humanity, and making the earth/universe a better place for us to live in. Be civilized, love each other, be enlightened… because right now you remind me of a bunch of religious nut jobs.

  60. andrew says

    @Thekinginyellow: Stephen Hawking is probably a bit smarter than you and he has recently said: “the universe doesn’t need a creator”. It seems to me that if the billion gallaxy universe has a creator it certainly isn’t the biblical god exchanging Abraham’s forskin for a covenant. The man made gods are just the stuff of fairy tales. Wicked fairy tales to be sure.

  61. JJ says

    To summarize @Thekinginyellow, “I can’t work out how nature works and all my assumptions are correct and my deadline for Science to provide all the answers is now and all it has to show are these useless collages. It must therefore follow that we were created by God! The universe came from nothing? That’s ridiculous! Clearly the universe came from God who came from nothing! That’s much more sensible and enlighted and dare I say simpler!”

  62. simon says

    Here is a video of an interesting debate on “Human Beings & Ultimate Origin” in Oxford featuring Prof. Richard Dawkins, Rowan Williams (Archbishop of Canterbury) and Anthony Kenny (philosopher)

    The surprising thing is that the Archbishop is a lot less “dogmatic” than I imagined.

  63. Jerry6 says

    The appalling thing about the business known as “Religion” is that it is not required to pay taxes like all other businesses. Churches and religious schools receive all of the same benefits of Government as other business enterprises, but do not pay anything for it. Just take into account the costs to government to protect private property when these dingbat pickets interrupt the funerals of our fallen soldiers. Or the costs to protect private property when these dingbats picket a retail enterprise that supports the rights of LGBT people?

  64. chuck says

    I taught science at a University in Minnesota for over 30 years. I ‘hope’ that at least 15% believe in evolution! I had ‘science’ students who not only did not believe in evolution but believed in guardian angels!
    My colleagues and I bemoaned the fact that students coming from MN high schools were becoming more and more science illiterate.
    One facet was that new teachers of science were being taught how to stroke student’s egos rather than teach them science. (5:1 ratio in their credential hours).

  65. Dave says

    The truth is the Christians did not evolve and they are still not evolving but instead they are trying to stop and oppress anything that is not in agreement with them. The Christians have been doing this for 2,000 years and earth is no better that it was with it’s wars, and crimes and mad men running around making trouble for people and we all know that most of the criminals in prison are Christians, so the Christians are criminals who are stopping and oppressing the others. the Christian idea of evolve is to enslave and make other conform to their brand of insanity so they can all agree on their madness which has not made earth a better place to live for 2,000 years. One would think that after 2,000 years of failing to deliver what they say can do that they would wake up and try something new that really worked.

  66. DRG says

    I thought Intelligent Design wasthe concept of evolution, only with God as the trigger instead of natual selection. It’s the creationist way of merging science and faith. In this belief, god changed monkey into ape, ape into cave men, and cavemen into humans which is a copy of Gods image. Right? That Earth and Man did develope over billions of years but that was 7 days in the eyes of God. Right? That is still a looney “the world is flat” scenario, but not as bad as creationism which denies science at all costs.

    It is shocking that 46% are full blown creationists. I thought that would only be the roman catholics and the evengelicals. yikes.

  67. Jerry6 says

    If evolution has not, and is not, happening, then why do not ALL children of a given couple NOT look EXACTLY the same? If we have not evolved over time why are there White people; Black people; Asian people; Eskimo people; South American indigianous People; Etc; Etc; Etc?

  68. D Bunker Monquis says

    So why can’t Evols just answer ID’ers questions about high level functional information in living things? DNA is writing and it did not just appear. Why not teach the youth about the glaring deficiencies so they can wonder and work on it? What part of real science is censorship, lawsuits and namecalling?