Posted on 08/11/2006 11:54:04 AM PDT by presidio9
A comparison of peoples' views in 34 countries finds that the United States ranks near the bottom when it comes to public acceptance of evolution. Only Turkey ranked lower.
Among the factors contributing to America's low score are poor understanding of biology, especially genetics, the politicization of science and the literal interpretation of the Bible by a small but vocal group of American Christians, the researchers say.
“American Protestantism is more fundamentalist than anybody except perhaps the Islamic fundamentalist, which is why Turkey and we are so close,” said study co-author Jon Miller of Michigan State University.
The researchers combined data from public surveys on evolution collected from 32 European countries, the United States and Japan between 1985 and 2005. Adults in each country were asked whether they thought the statement “Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals,” was true, false, or if they were unsure.
The study found that over the past 20 years:
The percentage of U.S. adults who accept evolution declined from 45 to 40 percent. The percentage overtly rejecting evolution declined from 48 to 39 percent, however. And the percentage of adults who were unsure increased, from 7 to 21 percent.
Of the other countries surveyed, only Turkey ranked lower, with about 25 percent of the population accepting evolution and 75 percent rejecting it. In Iceland, Denmark, Sweden and France, 80 percent or more of adults accepted evolution; in Japan, 78 percent of adults did.
The findings are detailed in the Aug. 11 issue of the journal Science.
Religion belief and evolution
The researchers also compared 10 independent variables—including religious belief, political ideology and understanding of concepts from genetics, or “genetic literacy”—between adults in America and nine European countries to determine whether these factors could predict attitudes toward evolution.
The analysis found that Americans with fundamentalist religious beliefs—defined as belief in substantial divine control and frequent prayer—were more likely to reject evolution than Europeans with similar beliefs. The researchers attribute the discrepancy to differences in how American Christian fundamentalist and other forms of Christianity interpret the Bible.
While American fundamentalists tend to interpret the Bible literally and to view Genesis as a true and accurate account of creation, mainstream Protestants in both the United States and Europe instead treat Genesis as metaphorical, the researchers say.
“Whether it’s the Bible or the Koran, there are some people who think it’s everything you need to know,” Miller said. “Other people say these are very interesting metaphorical stories in that they give us guidance, but they’re not science books.”
This latter view is also shared by the Catholic Church.
Politics and the Flat Earth
Politics is also contributing to America's widespread confusion about evolution, the researchers say. Major political parties in the United States are more willing to make opposition to evolution a prominent part of their campaigns to garner conservative votes—something that does not happen in Europe or Japan.
Miller says that it makes about as much sense for politicians to oppose evolution in their campaigns as it is for them to advocate that the Earth is flat and promise to pass legislation saying so if elected to office.
"You can pass any law you want but it won't change the shape of the Earth," Miller told LiveScience.
Paul Meyers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota who was not involved in the study, says that what politicians should be doing is saying, 'We ought to defer these questions to qualified authorities and we should have committees of scientists and engineers who we will approach for the right answers."
The researchers also single out the poor grasp of biological concepts, especially genetics, by American adults as an important contributor to the country's low confidence in evolution.
“The more you understand about genetics, the more you understand about the unity of life and the relationship humans have to other forms of life,” Miller said.
The current study also analyzed the results from a 10-country survey in which adults were tested with 10 true or false statements about basic concepts from genetics. One of the statements was "All plants and animals have DNA." Americans had a median score of 4. (The correct answer is "yes.")
Science alone is not enough
But the problem is more than one of education—it goes deeper, and is a function of our country's culture and history, said study co-author Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education in California.
“The rejection of evolution is not something that will be solved by throwing science at it,” Scott said in a telephone interview.
Myers expressed a similar sentiment. About the recent trial in Dover, Pennsylvania which ruled against intelligent design, Myers said "it was a great victory for our side and it’s done a lot to help ensure that we keep religion out of the classroom for a while longer, but it doesn’t address the root causes. The creationists are still creationists—they're not going to change because of a court decision."
Scott says one thing that will help is to have Catholics and mainstream Protestants speak up about their theologies' acceptance of evolution.
"There needs to be more addressing of creationism from these more moderate theological perspectives," Scott said. “The professional clergy and theologians whom I know tend to be very reluctant to engage in that type of ‘my theology versus your theology’ discussion, but it matters because it’s having a negative effect on American scientific literacy."
The latest packaging of creationism is intelligent design, or ID, a conjecture which claims that certain features of the natural world are so complex that they could only be the work of a Supreme Being. ID proponents say they do not deny that evolution is true, only that scientists should not rule out the possibility of supernatural intervention.
But scientists do not share doubts over evolution. They argue it is one of the most well tested theories around, supported by countless tests done in many different scientific fields. Scott says promoting uncertainty about evolution is just as bad as denying it outright and that ID and traditional creationism both spread the same message.
“Both are saying that evolution is bad science, that evolution is weak and inadequate science, and that it can’t do the job so therefore God did it,” she said.
Another view
Bruce Chapman, the president of the Discovery Institute, the primary backer of ID, has a different view of the study.
"A better explanation for the high percentage of doubters of Darwinism in America may be that this country's citizens are famously independent and are not given to being rolled by an ideological elite in any field," Chapman said. "In particular, the growing doubts about Darwinism undoubtedly reflect growing doubts among scientists about Darwinian theory. Over 640 have now signed a public dissent and the number keeps growing."
Nick Matzke of the National Center for Science Education in California points out, however, that most of the scientists Chapman refers to do not do research in the field of evolution.
"If you look at the list, you can't find anybody who's really a significant contributor to the field or anyone who's done recognizable work on evolution," Matzke said.
Scott says the news is not all bad. The number of American adults unsure about the validity of evolution has increased in recent years, from 7 to 21 percent, but growth in this demographic comes at the expense of the other two groups. The percentage of Americans accepting evolution has declined, but so has the percentage of those who overtly reject it.
"I was very surprised to see that. To me that means the glass is half full,” Scott said. “That 21 percent we can educate."
"Anyone who still beleives in evolution should read Coulter's 'Godless'."
Ann is not a scientist, is she? If not, why would I read anything she had to say about evolution. As it happens, I did read "Godless." She does nothing but repeat the same non-scientific stuff we read here every time the subject comes up.
That Americans reject evolution is not a concern.
That Americans don't know that all plants and animals have DNA is a bigger concern, but I seriously doubt that claim. It's possible Americans tuned out all discussion of genetics when the obvious fraud of evolution was so adamently pushed on them. But their other statistics appear biased, I bet this one is too.
This article is an obvious hit piece. It dredges up the myth that Christians believed in a flat earth. It falsely claims that scientists don't doubt evolution. It claims major political parties are making anti-evolution part of their platform, which is false. And it tries to minimize evolution doubters as "a small but vocal group of Christians", yet the article admits only 40% of Americans accept evolution.
But even these numbers are high according to recent polls. 77% of Republicans reject evolution of humans from another species. And so do a majority of democrats.
Are you saying because of a poll bioscience companies wont invest in America? I would wager that in the 1970's and early 1980's that America was just as or even more against or questionable of Evolution as now, even though some of the greatest biology discoveries were found here at that time, and many of the greatest discoveries are still taken place here in the USA, darn are whacky views.
This article seems to imply that opinions about evolution held by average Americans somehow impact research. They don't.
Kids who develop an interest in science will square it with their religious beliefs one way or another. I doubt that there are a number of potential Nobel prize winners digging ditches today instead of doing gene mapping because of religious issues.
We still seem to have all the scientists we need to remain on the bleeding edge of research.
As opposed to the pro-evolution non-science that comes up.
Evolutionists worship the events of the scopes trial the way liberals worship the events of the 'mccarthy' era.
Regardless of whether evolution is true or false, the fact of the matter is a lot of folks seem to enjoy fabricating evidence in favor of it.
You are right, that is a large part of it, but WHY is it that primarily Christian nations have developed the agriculture technology and processes to create such surpluses.
In times past as we were developing our agricultural abilites we would build churches as the one of the first most important buildings (before government buildings) in farm areas.
The church was at the center of those societies which flourished well ahead of non-Christian socieites.
Most non-Christian nations still can't figure out how to get the agriculture right because they do not have the cultural values necessary, in part. The other is that we are blessed by God.
No doubt.
Somehow I find it more pressing to have the 900million "peaceful" muslims denounce the 100million militant terrorist muslism.
...combined data from multiple studies over 20 years???? I once tried doing something like that in a stat course and my professor came close to spanking me with a keyboard.
I also can't beleve the average French peasant knows DNA from Beaujolais.
Maybe the "researchers" could explain why such a backward nation as the United States leads the world in science, including biotechnology??? Yet "advanced" nations like Turkey can't even figure out how to feed themselves. This study reeks of a waste of the perfectly good and harmless trees used to publish it.
Absurd nonsense. We dominate the Life Sciences. All these countries are Socialists to one extent or the other. Does that mean we should become Socialists? Just because a dogma is widely accepted does NOT make it a good idea.
Is Ann Coulter a subject expert in the field of biology?
This is silly. It is a bit like decrying that so few people speak Latin. Genetics is a specialized field and evolution contributes only marginally to the science. Where it might matter is that a research might suffer professionally if he didn't hold to the conventional wisdom of those in the department. He might not advance for the same reasons that a conservative in sociology might not advance: he can't get anone to publish because his reputation makes him suspect.
Evolution doesn't materially affect any practical science, but Evo's would have you believe that the sky is falling if we don't all accept evolution. Patrick Henry once posted an article that compared Christians to the Taliban and the article claimed that Christians would turn back the clock on science to the dark ages.
Yet it's evolution that has sent science down wrong turns. It's evolution that had doctors thinking it was ok to remove tonsils and tailbones and thinking that appendices had no function. It's evolution that claimed major portions of DNA were "junk DNA", had no function and were not worth researching.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
