US poll find majority of americans dont believe in evolution

I'm fine with the God guiding evolution. Can't really argue against that...

But that 51% figure is disappointing.
 
yeah, 808 people is fine for the statistics. too bad the statistics are ****ing WRONG.
 
Raeven0 said:
I'm fine with the God guiding evolution. Can't really argue against that...
Click to expand...

You can't argue against it because the God part isn't falsifiable.

That said, I too don't have an issue with people believing God started life and let evolution take its course, or that he guides the process. If you accept evolution, you're at least sane.
 
Gravity is not a theory, Newton proved it, Galileo proved it. My physics teacher proved it. However that all mankind evolved from monkey's and apes, that is a theory. It has not been proven. God has done wonders, you just have to know where to look.
 
M1CH43L said:
Gravity is not a theory, Newton proved it, Galileo proved it. My physics teacher proved it. However that all mankind evolved from monkey's and apes, that is a theory. It has not been proven. God has done wonders, you just have to know where to look.
Click to expand...

It's called the gravitational theory. It is a scientific theory, and you need to appreciate its distinction. You also misrepresent the theory of evolution. Nobody's saying that we evolved from monkeys and apes, but that we share a common ancestor. Do your research. Either way, though, it's abundantly clear that man has not always existed as he does today.

And pray tell, where exactly should I look for your God's wonders? Not that I think you'll be able to provide anything substantial. Just the oft-repeated "Goddidit" tripe.
 
M1CH43L said:
Gravity is not a theory, Newton proved it, Galileo proved it. My physics teacher proved it. However that all mankind evolved from monkey's and apes, that is a theory. It has not been proven. God has done wonders, you just have to know where to look.
Click to expand...

*Sigh* I wish people would get a clue about what a scientific theory is. It is not the same as a philosophical theory, which could be "I postulate that the world is made up of penis-eatting doughnuts, you can't prove it wrong, I can't prove it right, therefore it is a theory"

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it often does in other contexts. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from and/or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations that is predictive, logical and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory. Commonly, a large number of more specific hypotheses may be logically bound together by just one or two theories. As a general rule for use of the term, theories tend to deal with much broader sets of universals than do hypotheses, which ordinarily deal with much more specific sets of phenomena or specific applications of a theory.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

Gravity is a theory, because it has been time and time again observed by experimental evidence. Evolution is a theory because it has time and time again been observed by experimental evidence.

The word evolution is used to refer both to a fact and a theory. The existence of these two distinct meanings, and confusion over the relationship between and scientific definitions of fact and theory, have often caused misunderstandings among laypeople about the scientific status of evolution. In common language, the word fact is used to mean simply "something known to be true", but in science the word more specifically means "a confirmed observation". Likewise, while theory often means "speculation" or "conjecture" in nonscientific contexts, its scientific meaning is "a well-supported explanation".

As a fact, evolution is actually a commonplace occurrence that is regularly observed in a variety of forms. For example, evolution occurs whenever a new species of bacterium evolves a resistance to an antibiotic which previously was lethal to that bacterium. Biological organisms change over the course of many generations, as descendants are seen to go through a process of genetic modification that distinguishes them from their ancestors. The modification is most often the result of natural genetic synthesis, and the differential traits manifested may be translated into changes in the genetic composition of the population.

The modern scientific method seeks to formulate testable hypotheses—ideas which can be tested directly through experimentation and analysis of the evidence. After a hypothesis has been found to be consistent, and has held up under extensive testing, it is generally agreed that it represents a justified explanation of the observations, or facts, available: it becomes a theory. It is important to note that even though theories represent the best scientific explanations for observed phenomena, in no case is a scientific theory free from further testing and revision, nor is it necessarily considered a sufficient explanation of the observations to the exclusion of additional testable hypotheses. The same applies to scientific facts: a fact can always be replaced if the observation it is based upon turns out to have been misinterpreted.

In the case of evolution, the observation of organisms evolving, a fact, is explained by a theory of how they evolve. Past theories of evolution have either been refuted (e.g., Lamarckism) or expanded and revised (e.g., Darwinism), so that the modern theory of evolution—that is, the accepted explanation for how evolution occurs—is known as modern evolutionary synthesis. Modern evolutionary synthesis is considered a theory because it has stood up to extensive and repeated testing, and is consistent with all other theories and past observations. The broad scientific consensus is that it is the best explanation that has yet been proposed for the fact of evolution.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Status_as_fact_and_theory
 
i think the first thing that troubled me as a kid when hearing the "Adam and Steve (oeps Adam and Eve :p)" bible story is:
wtf, that means brother and sister must have... (lets not go there :p)
 
an examle of micro evolution is a mosquito that changed to a darker color when they moved into a subway but the fact is that before they moved into the subway there were already black mosquitos its just that they couldnt survive on surface since they would be easily spotted and thus killed of but when many of the mosquitos moved into the subway the light mosquitos would die while the dark mosquitos would survive. thats why i dont like macro evolution since we havent documented macro evolution
 
So if I conduct my own survey of 800 people and get different results, you smucks will believe it due to "statistics"?
 
Statistically, anything is possible.
 
15357 said:
Statistically, anything is possible.
Click to expand...

Statistically everything is possible. That's the problem.

Realistically, statistics can be very, very wrong but there is no way outside of statistics to verify statistics without going to great lengths which contradicts the point of statistics.
 
_Z_Ryuken said:
So if I conduct my own survey of 800 people and get different results, you smucks will believe it due to "statistics"?
Click to expand...


I don't think you're paying attention.. Statistics have some sampling error margins included.

If you'd read to the end of this article, you'd find the disclaimer:

This poll was conducted among a nationwide random sample of 808 adults, interviewed by telephone October 3-5, 2005. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus four percentage points.
Click to expand...
 
_Z_Ryuken said:
So if I conduct my own survey of 800 people and get different results, you smucks will believe it due to "statistics"?
Click to expand...
Like I said, you obviously don't know anything about statistics. I just finished a college level course on Statistics and got the highest possible score on the placement exam afterwards, so I DO have some vague indication. There is a LOT that goes into a survey like that, and the margin of errors, intervals, etc are as correct as they can be. The sample is set up to represent the population as accurately as possible - great lengths and pains are taken to ensure that the absolute minimum amount of sampling bias is achieved, especially in a professional survey such as this. They do not just call 800 random people and ask them... there's an entire science behind it, as well as behind the proper analysis of data. I doubt chi-squares, t, and z distributions mean anything to you, but there is a lot of proven and tested math behind it. The size of the sample plays a massive factor in the error margins - but you can be confident (I'm not sure of the confidence interval they used to get that error margin, but it's at least 95%) that the actual population is accurately reflected by those percentages, within the error margin.
 
kirovman said:
I don't think you're paying attention.. Statistics have some sampling error margins included.

If you'd read to the end of this article, you'd find the disclaimer:
Click to expand...

It's meaningless because you don't know how the error can be spread. It's totally random and inconclusive.
Ennui said:
Like I said, you obviously don't know anything about statistics. I just finished a college level course on Statistics and got the highest possible score on the placement exam afterwards, so I DO have some vague indication. There is a LOT that goes into a survey like that, and the margin of errors, intervals, etc are as correct as they can be. The sample is set up to represent the population as accurately as possible - great lengths and pains are taken to ensure that the absolute minimum amount of sampling bias is achieved, especially in a professional survey such as this. They do not just call 800 random people and ask them... there's an entire science behind it, as well as behind the proper analysis of data. I doubt chi-squares, t, and z distributions mean anything to you, but there is a lot of proven and tested math behind it.
Click to expand...
I doubt it makes a difference but I'll look into that.
 
What, you doubt that the whole science of statistics makes a difference?

Go study before you come on here and say random things.

Have you heard of error analysis before?
 
_Z_Ryuken said:
It's meaningless because you don't know how the error can be spread. It's totally random and inconclusive.
Click to expand...
Now, if that were true, would people really ever use polls or surveys to analyze data?
 
Look at it from my perspective.

Here are the "results":
God created humans in present form - 51%
Humans evolved, God guided the process - 30%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process - 15%

4% error margin:
God created humans in present form - 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55%
Humans evolved, God guided the process - 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process - 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19%

US population ~300,000,000
11% of 300mil, 33,000,000
19% of 300mil, 57,000,000

~24,000,000 people are not being accurately represented in this poll.
Not only that, there is a huge potential for bias. They didn't know who they were contacting. The error margin is likely MUCH higher than 4% because the number of samples is so low, and it is impossible to know for sure unless the people sampled were a specific demographic in which case the poll is still pointless and biased.

It doesn't even take into account the people that do not fit within the 3 options.
 
i couldn't tell you about this survey because i don't know their methods and i haven't read it - you were making statements about statistics in general and that is what i was responding to and still am

look at it from my perspective, i actually know what im talking about. the way these things work don't make sense to anyone who hasn't studied them - i didn't think it was anything close to accurate either until i took the class
 
delusional said:
an examle of micro evolution is a mosquito that changed to a darker color when they moved into a subway but the fact is that before they moved into the subway there were already black mosquitos its just that they couldnt survive on surface since they would be easily spotted and thus killed of but when many of the mosquitos moved into the subway the light mosquitos would die while the dark mosquitos would survive. thats why i dont like macro evolution since we havent documented macro evolution
Click to expand...

What? Look, let me break this down for you.

Macroevolution is microevolution over a long period of time. The current sum of microevultion, if you wish to term it as such. If you accept microevolution, but don't accept macroevoultion, you're saying there's an arbitrary cutoff point at which evolution stops.

Why would this be the case? Why would evolution just suddenly stop for no reason?
 
Macroevolution refers to evolution that occurs above the level of species, over long periods of time, that leads to speciation, in supposed contrast to microevolution, which refers to smaller evolutionary changes (described as changes in allele frequencies) within a species or population.
-From wiki.
 
Correct. The only thing that needs to happen before micro-evolution becomes macro evoltuoin is a slight change to the creatures sexual organs. From there each of the species can no longer mate, and thus diverge.

A new species of salmon is about to evolve, seperating pacific from atlantic salmon that would be one of the first widely observed events of multicellular speciation.

However, we see speciation (and thus macro-evolution) occuring in single-celled organisms all the time, and have observed at least 4 new species of drangonflies evolve over time, each one almost exactley the same except for a slight difference in the shape of their graspers, not allowing them to mate with the other species of dragonfly.

What you have to understand is that macroevolution happens largely due to geography. Two groups of the same species might get split, and will be on seperate continents, and thus cannot mate with each other. That way, any changes that occur in one population will not occur in the other, and the species eventually diverge until they are completley different from one another.
 
theotherguy said:
Correct. The only thing that needs to happen before micro-evolution becomes macro evoltuoin is a slight change to the creatures sexual organs. From there each of the species can no longer mate, and thus diverge.

A new species of salmon is about to evolve, seperating pacific from atlantic salmon that would be one of the first widely observed events of multicellular speciation.

However, we see speciation (and thus macro-evolution) occuring in single-celled organisms all the time, and have observed at least 4 new species of drangonflies evolve over time, each one almost exactley the same except for a slight difference in the shape of their graspers, not allowing them to mate with the other species of dragonfly.

What you have to understand is that macroevolution happens largely due to geography. Two groups of the same species might get split, and will be on seperate continents, and thus cannot mate with each other. That way, any changes that occur in one population will not occur in the other, and the species eventually diverge until they are completley different from one another.
Click to expand...

People have feelings. I don't like you trampling on my beliefs like that. So please, keep your nonsense about evolution to yourself! ;)
 
America will prevail this. 50 years from now, most of the First world countries will be more secular. 200 years from now, the only beliefs will probably be Deism, Atheism/Agnosticism, and Eastern philosophies.

At least, that's how I see it. BUT THEN, SOME EVIL DICTATOR WILL BRING BACK THEISM AND DESTROY THE KNOWN WORLD AS WE KNOW IT D:
 
deus, your holy ability to see the future is amazing.

wait a minute....

are you that evil dictator? D:
 
_Z_Ryuken said:
Look at it from my perspective.

Here are the "results":
God created humans in present form - 51%
Humans evolved, God guided the process - 30%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process - 15%

4% error margin:
God created humans in present form - 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55%
Humans evolved, God guided the process - 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process - 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19%

US population ~300,000,000
11% of 300mil, 33,000,000
19% of 300mil, 57,000,000

~24,000,000 people are not being accurately represented in this poll.
Not only that, there is a huge potential for bias. They didn't know who they were contacting. The error margin is likely MUCH higher than 4% because the number of samples is so low, and it is impossible to know for sure unless the people sampled were a specific demographic in which case the poll is still pointless and biased.

It doesn't even take into account the people that do not fit within the 3 options.
Click to expand...

WRONG.

Take several university level courses in statistics before you start making unqualified intrepretations. I don't have a degree in aeronautical engineering, so I don't make assumptions/decisions on airplane design. However, I have taken several statistics class at the undergraduate and graduate level, and this poll is in line with a sample size of 800 people.

A 4% "error margin" is better interpreted as a confidence interval. We can be reasonably confident (95%) that the true score of the population lies +/- 4% of 51%.

So if I conduct my own survey of 800 people and get different results, you smucks will believe it due to "statistics"?
Click to expand...

If you selected the 800 people according to accepted scientific methods, the sampling was random and the survey was reasonably non-biased, then yes, you're survey would be valid. In reality, you would probably not have results that deviated enough to be significant (p <0.05). A smattering of difference (ie, 47% say god created man in his present form) would probably not be enough to be significant, but just random error.
 
Random polls can be off.
Because it is Random. For all you know you could call all athiests and get a 100% Americans don't believe in god figure.

Anyway. I am planning to move here when i'm older. To much Christian bullshit.

Stern, hows Canada these days? Hmm... I wonder whats goin on in Mexico.....
 
US poll find majority of americans dont believe in evolution

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBS
Most Americans do not accept the theory of evolution. Instead, 51 percent of Americans say God created humans in their present form, and another three in 10 say that while humans evolved, God guided the process. Just 15 percent say humans evolved, and that God was not involved.




so in total 81% of americans believe god had a hand in creating man ...I think that's disporportionately high ..however I cant compare it to my own country becuase I cant find any data ..I'd assume it's much much less because as a whole canadians are not all that spiritual (sure we have pockets here and there but it's usually not very visible)


Poll Results:

God created humans in present form: 51%
Humans evolved, God guided the process: 30%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process: 15%

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in965223.shtml
Click to expand...

(fake quote):
disclaimer (may or may not be true):
"my country is better than yours, my country is better than yours!" -CapStern

some kind of complex you've got there stern

I think the only people who are truly devoted to god here are the elderly, people who are in jail, and/or people that don't have much time to live. I really don't believe the poll results, but If they are true, that is surprising. I hardly met anyone in my life that goes to church or prays before dinner anything - you would think the 2 go hand in hand since they don't even believe in evolution!

I've never in my life even met anyone that doesn't believe in evolution. Check location. So again, I think the poll is wacky, but whatever. There are some weird stereotypes I hear about certain states, so I guess it's possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gh0st
and hell, while we may just be a bunch of bible humping farm boys we're still the most technically advanced nation in the world.
Click to expand...

CapStern said:
yet despite this you cant seem to find a handful of men with 20 year old weapons hiding in caves
Click to expand...
Yes, maybe if he was wearing a t-shirt that said, "Gasoline .99 /gal" we could find him in minutes. :p


Stern, you remind me of the Mac versus PC commercials, and the one that comes to mind is the one some guy made, "Mac - nobody gives a shit"

Coincidentally, you defended apple after seeing that fake add. What does that mean? Well, I won't say for sure, but it means something. :p

"Canada - nobody gives a shit"

In case it wasn't implied, I'm messing with you. As my father says, "Canadians are always very nice"
 
Frankly, I think Stephen Hawking was right. There's just no place for a God in a science-based universe.
Our human nature compels us to justify probability as the act of an imaginary God.
 
God is an outdated concept. Of course I wouldn't tell some of my more religious friends that to their face, but god bless the anonymity of the internet...oh wait!
 
VirusType2 said:
(fake quote):
disclaimer (may or may not be true):
"my country is better than yours, my country is better than yours!" -CapStern

some kind of complex you've got there stern

I think the only people who are truly devoted to god here are the elderly, people who are in jail, and/or people that don't have much time to live. I really don't believe the poll results, but If they are true, that is surprising. I hardly met anyone in my life that goes to church or prays before dinner anything - you would think the 2 go hand in hand since they don't even believe in evolution!

I've never in my life even met anyone that doesn't believe in evolution. Check location. So again, I think the poll is wacky, but whatever. There are some weird stereotypes I hear about certain states, so I guess it's possible.




Yes, maybe if he was wearing a t-shirt that said, "Gasoline .99 /gal" we could find him in minutes. :p


Stern, you remind me of the Mac versus PC commercials, and the one that comes to mind is the one some guy made, "Mac - nobody gives a shit"

Coincidentally, you defended apple after seeing that fake add. What does that mean? Well, I won't say for sure, but it means something. :p

"Canada - nobody gives a shit"

In case it wasn't implied, I'm messing with you. As my father says, "Canadians are always very nice"
Click to expand...



till they knock your teeth out for cross-checking :cheers:


btw I have no idea what you're getting at ..macs?
 
God, I hate how religion spreads. One time, the words "Believe in god and you will be saved, and non-believers shall writh in agony eternally." was actually written on with blue ink on my 5000 won bill, when I recieved it as change. I proceeded to look through my wallet, and 2 more bills came out with similiar words.


And now I have orders to confiscate Yu-Gi-Oh cards from other students because the religious teachers think it demonic.

Wtf is wrong with this world?
 
There are countries in the world where people still believe in Witchcraft....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Community Interviews: Tony Newton, co-creator of Redemption
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Tyguy
39% of Americans Believe in Evolution
2 3
Replies
107
Views
7K
Citadel
Citadel
Harryz
Richard Dawkins new book - The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
DiscoBiscuit
DiscoBiscuit
jverne
seriously..wtf is wrong with these people? about evolution in schools
Replies
10
Views
860
99.vikram
99.vikram
Back
Top