Nearly Two-thirds of U.S. Adults Believe Human Beings Were Created by God

Opinions are divided about evolution theories

Earlier this year, the State Board of Education in Kansas reignited an old debate – whether or not creationism should be taught in public schools – and shone the spotlight on a new theory, intelligent design. While many in the scientific community may question why this issue has been raised again, a new national survey shows that almost two-thirds of U.S. adults (64%) agree with the basic tenet of creationism, that "human beings were created directly by God."

At the same time, approximately one-fifth (22%) of adults believe "human beings evolved from earlier species" (evolution) and 10 percent subscribe to the theory that "human beings are so complex that they required a powerful force or intelligent being to help create them" (intelligent design). Moreover, a majority (55%) believe that all three of these theories should be taught in public schools, while 23 percent support teaching creationism only, 12 percent evolution only, and four percent intelligent design only.

Thanks for the link.  I just pulled this out  of it to show that I was correct in what I stated earlier.  Between Creationists and those who believe in the ID theory that makes up 74% who believe there was at least some higher power while ONLY 22% believe in the Evolution Theory. 

Then why are we ONLY teaching one in the Public Schools when all three theories start with our pre-conceived biases?   Especially seeing that a whole 55% believe that we should be teaching all three? 

I'll tell you why....because our public schools are "government schools."  That's why.  Separation of church and state is their excuse.....there's no reason why all three can't be taught. 

People 'believed' the world was flat, that the Earth was the center of the universe - to the extent that they were willing to inflict what we now call 'cruel & unusual punishment' on those who publicly defied the orthodoxy.  An opinion poll is not science and I only linked it to show that arguing about which side is 'convincing' people is ludicrous, a sideshow.  The universe doesn't care about opinions, doesn't even know they exist, and won't bend it's immutable laws to accomodate them.

I agree...so quit will ya? 

I agree that it really doesn't matter who believes what.  I get that.  It doesn't matter if you have 10,000 guys and I have 100 guys who are with us.  What matters is the truth.  Since I'm a truth seeker, that's all I really care about anyhow.  Most of the time I'm on the wrong side of the opinion poll anyhow and I quite like that because it's less crowded. 

Look, maybe we need to get to basics here.  I am a Creationist and have looked at and studied both camps pretty extensively over the years.  If your definition of evolution is "change over time." then you can call me an evolutionist,...... because I do, believe it or not, believe in change over time.  But if you believe that we came from insects or trees or whatever is the latest theory then we have to part ways.  From what I understand there are different definitions of evolution. 

But I do believe that because I don't believe in the Evolutionary Theory as being taught which basically you can't really honestly pin it down, then I will never understand ET.  Because the definition put forth by the Evolutionists  is that only believing ET is understanding it which is ridiculous btw.  I understand alot of things that I don't believe in.  I'm sure you do to. 

Don't pin me with the CC and for goodness sake get a new example will ya?  I mean how old do you have to go back to try and prove your point?   I keep hearing this flat earth thing and it's getting quite old because......well it is old. 

a lil more than 80% of india's 1.15 billion people may believe in multiarmed female and multicolored elephant dieties--a number that's equal to nearly 66% of our entire population.   what's more, they've been believin in them for several thousand years before the patriarch of the religion which spawned your own began hearing a voice in his head telling him to kill his son.

truth is truth...notta popularity contest

A lot of kids believe in Santa Claus...but that doesn't mean he exists.

Apparently people can choose to believe whatever they want...but reality trumps belief.  Shame that so many people are utterly misinformed. :/  Oh well...

~Zoo

you haven't lived long enough Zoo......come back in 20 years and maybe you might be just as "misinformed" especially when you begin to see the strongholds you believe in, crumble and be obsolete as they "evolve." 

Truth never changes.   

exactly Kingbee.....can't remember when I've agreed with you so much on any issue but this is exactly right.  In fact, most people are NOT interested in truth anyhow.  Opinion is much more the normative these days. 

and yet you yourself offer poll results to indicate what? common sense vs the scientific method? popular opinion vs logic? belief in what cannot be proven vs objective analysis of physical evidence? 

roughly 100 years ago, belief in cyclops as decribed in other ancient texts musta gotta huge boost by the arrival in town of any  halfway competent traveling show impressario with an elephant skull.

I finally saw Stein's movie and enjoyed it so much I recommend it to everyone.

Where's academic freedom in the Univ. of Vermont? Where's all the so called tolerance of alternate viewpoints?

I get such a kick from Evolutionists who whine about not wanting religious views forced on students all the while pushing Darwin's Evolution Theory which is based on Atheistic Naturalism, a religious belief!

Dr. William Provine of Cornell University explained his and Darwin’s shared atheistic beliefs in this way: “Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear -- and these are basically Darwin’s views. There are no gods, no purposes, and no goal -- directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end of me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning in life, and no free will for humans, either. What an unintelligible idea.”

I finally saw Stein's movie and enjoyed it so much I recommend it to everyone.

Where's academic freedom in the Univ. of Vermont? Where's all the so called tolerance of alternate viewpoints?

I get such a kick from Evolutionists who whine about not wanting religious views forced on students all the while pushing Darwin's Evolution Theory which is based on Atheistic Naturalism, a religious belief!

Dr. William Provine of Cornell University explained his and Darwin’s shared atheistic beliefs in this way: “Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear -- and these are basically Darwin’s views. There are no gods, no purposes, and no goal -- directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end of me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning in life, and no free will for humans, either. What an unintelligible idea.”

Sorry for the double post...the edit button isn't working properly.

This is a false accusation.  Darwin's theory was based on observation of evidence.  Creationists bring atheism into the argument all the time, presumably in an effort to either discredit evolution by association or force equivalency of the theory with religion, thinking (dubiously) that so doing will strengthen the argument for creationism, wchich it simply doesn't.

It's ok Lula - you repeating yourself is quite expected.

If any scientific "theory" is put to use as a thwarting mechanism of a "belief" I find that objectionable.  I have never seen this done *personally*.  I don't find it objectionable because of some principle, but rather because it's just unnecessary.  In other words, it does not further the scientific theory for the discordant belief to disappear.  Put the labels where you wish - belief, theory, science, whatever.  The disappearance of something you feel is wrong does not bestow an effect of making you more right.

Maybe someday, ID will provide peer-reviewed work to the extent that it will garner some verisimilitude and acclaim across the sciences, but they're going to have to metaphorically "circumnavigate the globe" to prove the "earth is round" not just sail out to sea 100 yards, turn around, and come back to do it.

It reminds me of one of my favorite Firesign Theatre lines "I've just been to Ancient Greece!  Look at this grape!"

Lula posts:

Darwin observed variety within species, not evolution.

I know that it wasn't Darwin but his true-blue atheistic and agnostic followers who founded Evolution theory, which provided an Origins concept for which a transcendant God was not required. ET has become a world-view, a philosophy and it deals with beliefs not empirical science. ET has influenced politics, sociology, anthropology,  religion and any other field that touches upon questions of existence.

Even though Naturalistic Evolutionists were largely successful in doing away with the need for a Creator they failed utterly to prove scientifically that there indeed was a purely naturalistic "creation".  The theme of descent with modification has failed and naturalistic evolutionists live in hope the elusive mechanism will be found, but nothing so far. Evolution must be redefined as faith in a myth.

Well, gosh, lula, willful disregard for the language (not to mention facts) is not gonna win you any friends.

Darwin proposed a theory to explain the observed variety of species as well as the observed variety within species.  No more, no less.

The only people that have need for a Creator are the religious, Lula.  The rest of us wouldn't waste our time.  Nice try though.