Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

believe that god created humans in his likeness 10,000 years ago. I don't think the poll asked if the earth was round or not.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108226/Republicans-Democrats-Differ-Creationism.aspx

I knock republicans for thier political views, life views, and the racist "jokes" they are so fond of making. I do not however, knock anybody's beliefs.

Here is a more fair take on the issue.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

I follow the Theistic evolution view.
Now when you say that 60% of republicans still think Iraq masterminded 9/11 or somesuch, i'l be glad to back you up.

sexiest_hero wrote:I knock republicans for thier political views, life views, and the racist "jokes" they are so fond of making. I do not however, knock anybody's beliefs.

Here is a more fair take on the issue.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

I follow the Theistic evolution view.
Now when you say that 60% of republicans still think Iraq masterminded 9/11 or somesuch, i'l be glad to back you up.

Sometimes tolerance is not the answer.

Well Republicans who believe in some form of evolution are about the national average, however the proportion who believe in no evolution is quite a bit higher than the norm.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/11/darwin-200/

sexiest_hero wrote:I knock republicans for thier political views, life views, and the racist "jokes" they are so fond of making. I do not however, knock anybody's beliefs.

But what happens when the religious views determine their political views? If you knock their political views shouldn't you knock the source of the views?

olympia wrote:

But what happens when the religious views determine their political views? If you knock their political views shouldn't you knock the source of the views?

Political views are usually much easier to change than religious ones, and religious belief tends to be a non-issue in social interaction.

religion just leads to trouble, and guidlines in which to live by.
im happy enough without any religion.

olympia wrote:(60% of Republicans) believe that God created humans in his likeness 10,000 years ago. I don't think the poll asked if the earth was round or not.

I wonder if that is a higher or lower percentage than the proportion Democrats who believe that the aformentioned God is the guy who has just been elected president?

Orlanth wrote:

olympia wrote:(60% of Republicans) believe that God created humans in his likeness 10,000 years ago. I don't think the poll asked if the earth was round or not.

I wonder if that is a higher or lower percentage than the proportion Democrats who believe that the aformentioned God is the guy who has just been elected president?

I don't really believe anyone thinks Barack Obama is some kind of God like figure. That is some serious heresy in most religions.

http://www.venganza.org/

May his noodly goodness watch over us all.

This get's filed under "obvious yet meaningless." Republicans tend to be both more religious and more traditional. Throw in the tendency toward conformity, a respect for authority, and a suspicion of experts, and it's actually surprising how close the gap is between the parties.

It's meaningless because it doesn't really say anything about how people act or behave or believe in their day to day life. Probably not.

I stay very moderate on this opinion, because I think that any attempt to vilify or castigate religious folks tends to turn into a complete denial of the usefulness of theology or religion. I'm a strong supporter of science, and of separation of church and state, but I no more approve of mocking and trivializing religion than I do of ignoring scientific facts. I use science where science is useful, and religion where religion is useful.

Belief in creation science seems to be largely a U.S. phenomenon among countries the West. A British survey of 103 Roman Catholic priests, Anglican bishops and Protestant ministers/pastors showed that:

97% do not believe the world was created in six days.
80% do not believe in the existence of Adam and Eve.

Tallies (more or less) with my experiences over here, even amongst the few christian people I know I don't know anyone who takes the Bible as a literal word for word truth. Had some quite enlightening conversations with a fair few senior clergy this summer and with the exception of those from somewhat..... disorderly..African nations they were all in the "much of the Bible is a metaphor" camp. Even the septics which surprised me from my online experiences.

Here's the results of a study that was performed recently... I thought the UK would do worse but then we do have Darwin on the £10 bank note. The question was if you think the theory of evolution is true or not.

The latest bit of support for evolution is the discovery in Pakistan of fossils of whale-like creatures which are intermediate between modern whales and non-sea-going mammals.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/First-Whales-Spawned-on-Dry-land-103648.shtml

Wow, I'm so pleased I just payed to be a DCM so you people could attack religion.

In the immortal words of Ron White. "Well feth you."

I'm going to go away for awhile.

Very suspicious of such Polls myself. Sure, they might have asked 1,000 Republicans to get their figure...

But where was the poll conducted? If they went to the middle of the Bible Belt, then, like....duh. You're in an area globally noted for Religious Conservatism.

IF they asked the Republicans in nominally Democrat areas....well..slightly more surprising.

It's like when polls claim '85% of 12-15 year olds smoke Cannabis hourly!' Yes, because when you ask a yoof whether they do something vaguely naughty, and something typically seen as 'cool'.... they are going to tell the truth, and not just try to prove how grown up they are are they? Oh no. Not at all.

One mistake the majority of posters and pollsters make is lumping all fundamentalist or devout christians under the republican party. The two are not synonymous. One of the core constituencies of the democratic party are african americans, many of whom are very devout christians themselves, and their views on evolution are in line with christians from the republican party. Also another strong demographic in the democratic party is immigrants from central and south america. The latinos are by and large extremely devout, and extremely catholic, as such they're views would likely be in line with christians in the republican party. The below link is from a gallup poll taken in 1991. Since peoples religious beliefs typically do not change much over time this poll would likel;y still be relavent today.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

My point is that belief in creation vs evolution is not tied to political party, it is tied to religion. What the original pollster and poster seemed to want is to create a logical fallacy that republicans are all ignorant people who believe in religion over science, by ignoring that democrats can be religious also. And remember a poll is only as good as its source. The same question if worded differently can get widely different answers.

Case in point if most people were asked:
Do you think it is moral to kill babies? With no other qualifying statements most people would say no. And anti abortion people would trumpet the results saying most people do not support abortion.

However if you asked:
Do you think it is morall justified to terminate a pregnancy if the pregnancy would result in the mother's death?
Most people would say the it is morally justified, and the pro abortion crowd would trumpet the results stating that most people support abortion.

Use you heads people and take every poll with a huge grain of salt.

You are right that poll questions can be very biasing of the results.

In this case the poll was conducted by Gallup, a reputable company.

The methodology and question are shown -- they are not biaising. The evolution question replies cross-correlate with religious observance and political affiliation. (Correlation does not indicate causation, of course.) The same poll has been conducted annually since 1982.

So I would say your contention that the purpose of the poll is to show that Republicans are ignorant is incorrect.

NEver mind....

I really should double read things before posting.

Sorry folks!

"In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls."

The above is a direct quote from the article discussing the poll. Gallup admits the results might be biased. The major question poll reports often neglect to answer, is who paid to have the poll done. That will also have a major impact on the results. Gallup is one of many polling organizations. They are paid to conduct a poll. If the customer does not like the results, they will in the future go to another polling company. Therefore they will skew the results to what the people paying for the poll want.

There is definitive evidence supporting this view. The gold standard for scientific validity is the double blind test. That is where the people administering the test as well as the test subjects are unaware of the desired result. It is used extensively in the pharmaceutical industry. The company will send the sample to an independent organization to do the test. They will not tell the testing company what pills have the active, and which have the placebo. Therefore the people administering the test cannot bias the results by ltting the people taking the meds know which is the placebo and which is the active.

They do this because there is a lot of evidence showing that when someone is administering a test or conducting the poll, the results are skewed towards what the desired result is.

So, why would someone want to pay money to have this poll taken, unless the goal was to discredit or demean the party the question was targeting?

If I understand you correctly, you suppose that the poll has been got up by opponents of the Republican party, to label them as stupid because most of them believe in creationism or God-guided evolution.

Note that over 80% of Democrats and Independents hold the same beliefs.

Surely the poll sponsor only manages to label them as a bit less stupid than the Republicans? It hardly seems like a winning political gambit.

More grist for the mill. Enjoy.

Where did the 80% number come from?

And the only point that I am trying to make is that all polls are motivated by something. People should take all of them with a huge dose of skepticism. Polls as currently used by the media, corporations, and politicians are twofold. One is to gauge public opinion, and the other is to influence public opinion. They gauge public opinion, in order to influence public opinion. So if a poll comes out that paints a group in a negative light, always ask why and how that poll was conducted.

sexiest_hero wrote:I knock republicans for thier political views, life views, and the racist "jokes" they are so fond of making. I do not however, knock anybody's beliefs.

Unfortunately it isn't that simple. There's faith and personal truth and all that stuff, and there's claims that the Earth was made 6,000 years ago. The survey clearly distinguished the two with different options. A lot of people chose the answer that doesn't just demonstrate personal faith, but a wilful rejection of modern science. It is relevant and it isn't good enough to shrug and say 'personal beliefs'.

dogma wrote:Political views are usually much easier to change than religious ones, and religious belief tends to be a non-issue in social interaction.

If there is a significant majority willing to deny the science of the age of the Earth, that goes beyond personal belief. That's a significant amount of ignorance and something that needs to be addressed.

Frazzled wrote:Wow, I'm so pleased I just payed to be a DCM so you people could attack religion.

In the immortal words of Ron White. "Well feth you."

I'm going to go away for awhile.

Hang on, so what are we allowed to say on this forum?

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Very suspicious of such Polls myself. Sure, they might have asked 1,000 Republicans to get their figure...

But where was the poll conducted? If they went to the middle of the Bible Belt, then, like....duh. You're in an area globally noted for Religious Conservatism.

Gallup are a well established organisation who have been running this poll for a long time. This isn't some fly-by-night mob reporting these figures.

Mango wrote:Case in point if most people were asked:
Do you think it is moral to kill babies? With no other qualifying statements most people would say no. And anti abortion people would trumpet the results saying most people do not support abortion.

However if you asked:
Do you think it is morall justified to terminate a pregnancy if the pregnancy would result in the mother's death?
Most people would say the it is morally justified, and the pro abortion crowd would trumpet the results stating that most people support abortion.

Use you heads people and take every poll with a huge grain of salt.

Uh, no. What you appear to be asking is for people to assume every poll is dubious, which will stop people using a valuable source of data. I think the better solution is for people to follow up on any survey that produces an interesting result, look into the methodolgy and the questions asked. Find out if a survey result is to be trusted.

Mango wrote:So, why would someone want to pay money to have this poll taken, unless the goal was to discredit or demean the party the question was targeting?

The poll has been taken regularly since the early 80s. I'm not sure but I doubt it's a paid for survey, polling companies will do a lot of polling for their own sake, things of general interest that get widely reported will increase their reputation and increase the business of their paid for polling (normally lots more boring stuff like 'what word comes to mind when you think Hyundai?').

oh ffs. Plonius is right, none of this means anything. Belief in creationism doesn't make them stupid it just means they're stubborn.

And for the record, religion itself isn't the cause of all the problems in the world as a lot of atheists and others who's belief abide closely to the laws of science make out. It's the people who feel it's right to criticise others who's beliefs differ from their own who cause the problems. Much like atheists, non creationists, a number of posters in this thread, telling creationists they're stupid, ignorant bla bla bla.

Fail!

Mango wrote:Where did the 80% number come from?

And the only point that I am trying to make is that all polls are motivated by something. People should take all of them with a huge dose of skepticism. Polls as currently used by the media, corporations, and politicians are twofold. One is to gauge public opinion, and the other is to influence public opinion. They gauge public opinion, in order to influence public opinion. So if a poll comes out that paints a group in a negative light, always ask why and how that poll was conducted.

Well, yeah, look into the polling company and the company's methodology, but don't just assume it's dubious without actually looking into the company and the methodology. This survey is from a reputable company, and they've shown their methodology and it doesn't look manipulated at all.

whatwhat wrote:oh ffs. Plonius is right, none of this means anything. Belief in creationism doesn't make them stupid it just means they're stubborn.

There is nothing wrong with believing in God. There is a lot wrong with stating all information found by the Empirical method is wrong and I know the secret truth and the world is really 10,000 years old. It's the difference between a personal view on an unknowable question and ignorance.

And for the record, religion itself isn't the cause of all the problems in the world as a lot of atheists and others who's belief abide closely to the laws of science make out. It's the people who feel it's right to criticise others who's beliefs differ from their own who cause the problems. Much like atheists, non creationists, a number of posters in this thread, telling creationists they're stupid, ignorant bla bla bla.

Yeah, religion isn't the source of the world's ills. It's a large collection of beliefs and of organisations, each with long histories full of great highs and great lows.

People who are opinionated also aren't the source of the world's ills. It may be obnoxious for someone on the internet to declare faith or atheism to be utterly wrong, but it's still just some guy on the internet, he isn't sending people to gulags or anything.

But again, there's a difference between religious belief and a denial of the scientific record. People can believe what they want about God's guiding hand and any possible purpose for putting us here. But when you take that next step and deny the scientific record, it's a big deal and needs to be treated as such.

Fail!

Indeed.

Denial of the scientific record is hardly reserved to religions.

Look at the current issue in the UK of the MMR vaccine, and also the issue about classification of Ecstasy and Cannabis. Completely separate and non-religious groups in both cases are going totally against the scientific knowledge.

I didn't say "one guy on the internet" is causing all the problems did I, it's his self rightous atitude which a lot of other people have which does. And you fit perfectly into that category.

If this thread is going to devolve into 'people who harbour beliefs which contradict with scientific fact have no say in politics, are ignorant, stupid etc. etc.' which is basicly what it was from the off. imo it deserves to be locked to be honest regardless of who is wrong or right, it's just plane inflammatory to anyone who is of the opposite belief. (and i'm not saying I am either)

sebster wrote:

Fail!

Indeed.

Agreed.

Kilkrazy wrote:Denial of the scientific record is hardly reserved to religions.

Look at the current issue in the UK of the MMR vaccine, and also the issue about classification of Ecstasy and Cannabis. Completely separate and non-religious groups in both cases are going totally against the scientific knowledge.

Absolutely, ignorance should be addressed everywhere.