"Why doesn't America believe in evolution?" - NewScientist.com

[Joe Republic]

Linky



Why doesn't America believe in evolution?

09:00 20 August 2006
Jeff Hecht


Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals: true or false? This simple question is splitting America apart, with a growing proportion thinking that we did not descend from an ancestral ape. A survey of 32 European countries, the US and Japan has revealed that only Turkey is less willing than the US to accept evolution as fact.

Religious fundamentalism, bitter partisan politics and poor science education have all contributed to this denial of evolution in the US, says Jon Miller of Michigan State University in East Lansing, who conducted the survey with his colleagues. "The US is the only country in which [the teaching of evolution] has been politicised," he says. "Republicans have clearly adopted this as one of their wedge issues. In most of the world, this is a non-issue."

Miller's report makes for grim reading for adherents of evolutionary theory. Even though the average American has more years of education than when Miller began his surveys 20 years ago, the percentage of people in the country who accept the idea of evolution has declined from 45 in 1985 to 40 in 2005 (Science, vol 313, p 765). That's despite a series of widely publicised advances in genetics, including genetic sequencing, which shows strong overlap of the human genome with those of chimpanzees and mice. "We don't seem to be going in the right direction," Miller says.

There is some cause for hope. Team member Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, California, finds solace in the finding that the percentage of adults overtly rejecting evolution has dropped from 48 to 39 in the same time. Meanwhile the fraction of Americans unsure about evolution has soared, from 7 per cent in 1985 to 21 per cent last year. "That is a group of people that can be reached," says Scott.

The main opposition to evolution comes from fundamentalist Christians, who are much more abundant in the US than in Europe. While Catholics, European Protestants and so-called mainstream US Protestants consider the biblical account of creation as a metaphor, fundamentalists take the Bible literally, leading them to believe that the Earth and humans were created only 6000 years ago.

Ironically, the separation of church and state laid down in the US constitution contributes to the tension. In Catholic schools, both evolution and the strict biblical version of human beginnings can be taught. A court ban on teaching creationism in public schools, however, means pupils can only be taught evolution, which angers fundamentalists, and triggers local battles over evolution.

These battles can take place because the US lacks a national curriculum of the sort common in European countries. However, the Bush administration's No Child Left Behind act is instituting standards for science teaching, and the battles of what they should be has now spread to the state level.

Miller thinks more genetics should be on the syllabus to reinforce the idea of evolution. American adults may be harder to reach: nearly two-thirds don't agree that more than half of human genes are common to chimpanzees. How would these people respond when told that humans and chimps share 99 per cent of their genes?

[ilikeverin]

American adults may be harder to reach: nearly two-thirds don't agree that more than half of human genes are common to chimpanzees.

lol wtf?  We spent like a month on evolution in my biology class... thank goodness...

[afleitch]

Good to see the UK putting in a good performance

[Boris]

Does anyone by any chance have a state by state breakdown on evolution? I'd love to see that map.

[Speed of Sound]

I really need to get out of here. Those numbers are unexplainable and pathetic.

[MODU]

I think it is a bit more involved than that.  I'm sure most of Americans believe in Micro-evolution, which the article kind of ignores.  True, we do have a very close genetic match with chimps, but we also have the same number of chromosomes as oak trees, so did we descend from them too?  Yes, I know, it's a ridiculous example, but it is fair none the less.  Just because they are close in number/make-up doesn't mean that they have a historical link.  That is just scientific reasoning.  To believe in macro-evolution (which requires faith since it hasn't been proven) is the same as in believing in creationism (which requires faith since it hasn't been proven).  I'm sure once one or the other has been proven; you'll see a measurable switch in public opinion one way or another.

(And yes, we've had this discussion ad nauseum before, so I'm not going to repeat prior thoughts/comments on it.)

[jerusalemcar5]

I think it is a bit more involved than that.  I'm sure most of Americans believe in Micro-evolution, which the article kind of ignores.  True, we do have a very close genetic match with chimps, but we also have the same number of chromosomes as oak trees, so did we descend from them too?  Yes, I know, it's a ridiculous example, but it is fair none the less.  Just because they are close in number/make-up doesn't mean that they have a historical link.  That is just scientific reasoning.  To believe in macro-evolution (which requires faith since it hasn't been proven) is the same as in believing in creationism (which requires faith since it hasn't been proven).  I'm sure once one or the other has been proven; you'll see a measurable switch in public opinion one way or another.

(And yes, we've had this discussion ad nauseum before, so I'm not going to repeat prior thoughts/comments on it.)

What does the having the EXACT SAME genes have to do with having the same number?  have you studied Biology or evolution?  Your example is not fair, it is irrelevant.

Number means nothing, at all, so get off that track please.  Um, how do we do DNA matches between families?  Oh, because our genes are similar... But that process is ENTIRELY different when we involve other species right?  No...

Gravity, the Cell theory, and the Atomic theory haven't been proven. The can't be proven.  It is not scientifically possible. Guess it requires a lot of faith to believe in those too, since I know I have to wonder whether the theories of evolution, gravity, cell, atoms, germs, and a host of others are true when ALL evidence points to them and there isn't any shred of real evidence contradicting any of them (which is why they reached the highest rank in science, theory.)

[afleitch]

True, we do have a very close genetic match with chimps, but we also have the same number of chromosomes as oak trees, so did we descend from them too?  Yes, I know, it's a ridiculous example, but it is fair none the less.  Just because they are close in number/make-up doesn't mean that they have a historical link.

A few points

1. We didn't descenf 'from apes' we share a common ancestor.
2. We also share a common, but far far far more distant ancestor with oak trees
3. A similar number of chromosomes as another species does not equate similarity; people with Down's Syndrome for example have an extra chromosome 21, one more than other humans or an oak tree, yet they are still human.

[12th Doctor]

Because fundamentalist "pastors" who don't have any theological training have convinced people that it is opposed to the Bible.

[David S]

I can only speak for myself and say that I would probably fall into the "not sure" category. I believe evolution plays a role but I'm not convinced that it answers all of the questions about the development of various species.

Also while there is substantial evidence supporting the theory of evolution, there has not been proof in the  sense that we have witnessed one species evolve from another. So evolution seems to offer a plausible explanation, but it does not offer proof. By comparison Einstein's theory of general relativity has been tested repeatedly and always found to be correct with the exception of the realm of subatomic particles which can only be explained by quantum theory.

[afleitch]

Also while there is substantial evidence supporting the theory of evolution, there has not been proof in the  sense that we have witnessed one species evolve from another.

It can never be seen; it is a long term effect and we can only observe steps in that process over the course of one lifetime or human history. We know that the North American and European plates are drifting apart; that the Atlantic is widening we can even measure the rate, but you will never actually see the whole process, it's just impossible; but you can theorise that at one time both plates were joined; you can never be 100% sure, but it's a close as you're going to get.

[MODU]

3. A similar number of chromosomes as another species does not equate similarity; people with Down's Syndrome for example have an extra chromosome 21, one more than other humans or an oak tree, yet they are still human.

True, but in general (we're not talking mutations), humans have 46 chromosomes (23 pairs), while chimps have 48 (24 pairs).  Additionally, the chromosome matching among bands are not same (sometimes significantly different) between the two sets, as well as with other apes/monkeys. 

(And I was just using it as an example, and not the foundation of a debate.) 

[Jake]

Because fundamentalist "pastors" who don't have any theological training have convinced people that it is opposed to the Bible.

This is pretty accurate. Describes a lot about what's wrong with America, particularly religion in America, and certainly Protestant religion in America.

[jerusalemcar5]

3. A similar number of chromosomes as another species does not equate similarity; people with Down's Syndrome for example have an extra chromosome 21, one more than other humans or an oak tree, yet they are still human.

True, but in general (we're not talking mutations), humans have 46 chromosomes (23 pairs), while chimps have 48 (24 pairs).  Additionally, the chromosome matching among bands are not same (sometimes significantly different) between the two sets, as well as with other apes/monkeys. 

(And I was just using it as an example, and not the foundation of a debate.) 

It indicates a relationship.  Not all that close of one, but certainly support descending from a common ancestor recently (in geologic sense).

[MasterJedi]

Because fundamentalist "pastors" who don't have any theological training have convinced people that it is opposed to the Bible.

This is pretty accurate. Describes a lot about what's wrong with America, particularly religion in America, and certainly Protestant religion in America.

Yep, pretty accurate.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

The main opposition to evolution comes from fundamentalist Christians, who are much more abundant in the US than in Europe. While Catholics, European Protestants and so-called mainstream US Protestants consider the biblical account of creation as a metaphor, fundamentalists take the Bible literally, leading them to believe that the Earth and humans were created only 6000 years ago.

If "fundamentalists" are outside of the "so-called mainstream US Protestants" then why is America split on the subject of evolution?  It seems to me that the results of the survey  convey a different story: rejecting evolution is a very mainstream belief among US Protestants.

[Rob]

I really need to get out of here. Those numbers are unexplainable and pathetic.

^^^^^^^^^^

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

We have a useless surplus rural anglo/germanic/irish/scots-irish population that's why.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Blacks at least aren't fundamentalist so they rank above the germanic hicks

[Joe Republic]

The main opposition to evolution comes from fundamentalist Christians, who are much more abundant in the US than in Europe. While Catholics, European Protestants and so-called mainstream US Protestants consider the biblical account of creation as a metaphor, fundamentalists take the Bible literally, leading them to believe that the Earth and humans were created only 6000 years ago.

If "fundamentalists" are outside of the "so-called mainstream US Protestants" then why is America split on the subject of evolution?  It seems to me that the results of the survey  convey a different story: rejecting evolution is a very mainstream belief among US Protestants.

I think it's fair to say that the fundies certainly constitute a particularly vocal (and well-funded) minority.  And considering that the President is arguably one of them, we can reasonably conclude that while small, they are certainly influential.

[Speed of Sound]

Blacks at least aren't fundamentalist so they rank above the germanic hicks

Blacks aren't fundamentalists? If Im not mistaken, and I may be, Ill have to get Phils approval here, but I believe that the Black community, especially in cities like Philly, hold a high percentage of fundamentalist Christians.

[Joe Republic]

Blacks at least aren't fundamentalist

[MasterJedi]

I really need to get out of here. Those numbers are unexplainable and pathetic.

^^^^^^^^^^

Have fun in all those socialistic hell holes.

[Joe Republic]

I really need to get out of here. Those numbers are unexplainable and pathetic.

^^^^^^^^^^

Have fun in all those socialistic hell holes.

You might find that the majority of the countries polled are hardly "socialistic".  And I fail to see what their economies have to do with their populaces' opinions on rigorous scientific theories.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

IIRC there was a minor media storm about a poll that said that one third of new Uni students (ie; those starting this year. Or last year. Don't matter either way) didn't believe in evolution. Or believed in intelligent design. Or creationism. Can't recall which either.