The Growing Disbelief in Evolution Among Republicans

[Ouroboros]

I don't see how evolution can even be on the table as a live option to reject.I think evolutionary scientists should up their game in presenting the basic evidence in a simple way, a compelling way, in a systematic and directed way. This is disturbing and bizarre.

That's the problem. The theory of evolution isn't easy to understand at times. The simple explanations don't measure up to the actual models. To look at the whole picture of how evolution works, it takes some time to study and understand. There are many components to it. (I spent 32 weeks some time ago, reading about 1000 pages, it takes effort, and that was only the introductory courses. I wouldn't even want to do the biochem classes. They're considered some of the hardest to do.)

 

[1robin]

In as much as 84% of the world's population has religious faith*, just what "majority" are you talking about?

I highly doubt any poll has asked evolutionists if they're "hostile" to the idea of religion, although some polls have asked religious people about their stance, not hostility, toward evolution

​

So, considering the above poll, which shows 60% of adults believing in evolution and that many Christians---which help make up the 84% of religious people in the world---believe in evolution, I strongly suspect that there are NOT " far more "evolutionists" hostile to the idea of religion than there are religious people hostile to the idea of evolution

* source

Very good post. Since the Bible suggested things evolve after their kind I do not think many Christians question it. The disagreement seems to be more about macro-evolution or a Godless genetic explanation in totality for the reality
we all observe.

 

[Alceste]

I don't see how evolution can even be on the table as a live option to reject.I think evolutionary scientists should up their game in presenting the basic evidence in a simple way, a compelling way, in a systematic and directed way. This is disturbing and bizarre.

Careful what you wish for...
The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I don't see how evolution can even be on the table as a live option to reject.

There are still people who reject that the Earth is spherical.

I think evolutionary scientists should up their game in presenting the basic evidence in a simple way, a compelling way, in a systematic and directed way. This is disturbing and bizarre.

Unfortunately, there will always be people who don't base their views on facts and evidence, no matter how clearly, simply, and succinctly you state it. Of course, there will also always be people that are simply incapable of comprehending certain things - evolutionary theory clearly being an example of this.

 

[Skwim]

I don't see how evolution can even be on the table as a live option to reject.I think evolutionary scientists should up their game in presenting the basic evidence in a simple way, a compelling way, in a systematic and directed way. This is disturbing and bizarre.

Like most other scientists "evolutionary scientists" aren't all that concerned about lay people understanding them. They are more concerned with working out the issues in their particular field and presenting their findings to their peers. So, aside from science popularizers, don't look for too much from the scientists themselves.

 

[metis]

I think it's more of a vocal minority of evolutionists doing that.

Someone recently said that there are different kinds of anthropology. Cultural and Biological anthropology. Cultural is about our development and "evolution" of thought, belief, religion, society etc. While biological is about, well, our physical appearance. Those two are two different sub-sciences to anthropology. There's no need to have them in conflict. They both suggest two different lines of development of the human species. Religion isn't in conflict with biology, unless a person thinks it is.

Just a minor correction: it's "cultural anthropology" and "physical anthropology", but you got the right idea. I started out in physical during most of my undergraduate work but then switched to cultural with my graduate work.

 

[Moishe3rd]

In as much as 84% of the world's population has religious faith*, just what "majority" are you talking about?

I highly doubt any poll has asked evolutionists if they're "hostile" to the idea of religion, although some polls have asked religious people about their stance, not hostility, toward evolution

​

So, considering the above poll, which shows 60% of adults believing in evolution and that many Christians---which help make up the 84% of religious people in the world---believe in evolution, I strongly suspect that there are NOT " far more "evolutionists" hostile to the idea of religion than there are religious people hostile to the idea of evolution

* source

Breaking it down, your graph appears to portray that normative believing Christians are split on the very specific question whether or not Man existed in his present form since the beginning of Time.

My point was that I am pretty sure that the overwhelming majority (100%?) of those who firmly believe in the theory of evolution ("believing evolutionists?") totally reject the idea that Man was Created by G-d.

So - there is a 50/50 split between believing Christians and/or Republicans whether or not Man evolved.

I am pretty sure that those who take evolution as gospel reject the idea of a Creator almost 100%

Which was my original point.

 

[Moishe3rd]

I'm not certain of this. How many times have I been told I'm going to hell by many "religious" because I don't believe as they do? And how many people have we seen go through here on various threads telling science-oriented people here that we really don't know science because we don't parrot a literalistic interpretation of the creation accounts? I've seen a great deal of hostility towards science from so many on both the political and religious right, and evolution is not the only area.

I'm not sure where you are getting your data.
Online?
I am an ("ultra") Orthodox Jew and I tend to be friendly towards other religious believers that I meet, striking up conversations with everyone and, if the opportunity presents, discussing religion with all sorts of people.

Nobody in my community resembles what you are describing above.
And, I have never really met many other "believers" (mostly Christian or Muslim) who come close to the kind of disapprobation you are describing.

It is true that I find this here; online; in the media; etc. But, even so, I find many more fanatical Leftists or Secularists preaching their version of "hate science," trying to disprove religion, for G-d knows what reasons, than I do "religionists" trying to shout down evolutionary secularists.

 

[Skwim]

My point was that I am pretty sure that the overwhelming majority (100%?) of those who firmly believe in the theory of evolution ("believing evolutionists?") totally reject the idea that Man was Created by G-d.

So all of the 68% of white Catholics and 78% of white mainline Protestants who believe that "humans have evolved over time" reject the idea of a creator? Gotta say, Moishe3rd, this is one very warped notion. Not that you're not entitled to your opinion, but !!!

 

[CynthiaCypher]

What is going on with these people?

How about this: They do not like you. They do not like people like you. They do not like the things you believe in. They think that you are evil and for good reason.

They are merely considering the source. They reject the theory of evolution not because they reject science, they reject it because they reject everything certain people in the other side of political stand for, so what we get is guilt by association. They believe that you are trying to destroy them and their way of life, and to them that is threatening. So why wouldn't they reject the things you try to push on them?

 

[metis]

My point was that I am pretty sure that the overwhelming majority (100%?) of those who firmly believe in the theory of evolution ("believing evolutionists?") totally reject the idea that Man was Created by G-d...

I am pretty sure that those who take evolution as gospel reject the idea of a Creator almost 100%

Most Christians and most Christian theologians do not have a problem with the ToE as long as it's understood that God ultimately created all. The same holds true in Judaism overall, according to the surveys I've seen. For example:

While all of the major movements of American Judaism – including the Reconstructionist, Reform, Conservative and Orthodox branches – teach that God is the creator of the universe and all life, Jewish teachings generally do not find an inherent conflict between evolutionary theory and faith. -- Religious Groups

The results varied by religion: 51% of Catholics, 32% of Protestants, 80% of Jews, and 16% of born-again Christians believed in Darwin's theory of evolution, while 37% of Catholics, 56% of Protestants, 20% of Jews, and 68% of born-again Christians believed in creationism. -- Evolution in a new Harris poll | NCSE

Also check out this chart near the bottom of this page: Evolution in a new Harris poll | NCSE

 

[metis]

I'm not sure where you are getting your data.
Online?
I am an ("ultra") Orthodox Jew and I tend to be friendly towards other religious believers that I meet, striking up conversations with everyone and, if the opportunity presents, discussing religion with all sorts of people.

Nobody in my community resembles what you are describing above.
And, I have never really met many other "believers" (mostly Christian or Muslim) who come close to the kind of disapprobation you are describing.

It is true that I find this here; online; in the media; etc. But, even so, I find many more fanatical Leftists or Secularists preaching their version of "hate science," trying to disprove religion, for G-d knows what reasons, than I do "religionists" trying to shout down evolutionary secularists.

I have never been told I'm going to hell by anyone who's Jewish, so I'm sorry that what I posted seemingly misled you. I have had plenty of contact with many of the chasidim over the years, and almost all of it was positive-- not negative.

As far as the latter is concerned, our experiences are the opposite, but that may well be accounted for by whom we mostly discuss things with, which probably is different between us because of the circles we live and associate within.

 

[brokensymmetry]

That's the problem. The theory of evolution isn't easy to understand at times. The simple explanations don't measure up to the actual models. To look at the whole picture of how evolution works, it takes some time to study and understand. There are many components to it. (I spent 32 weeks some time ago, reading about 1000 pages, it takes effort, and that was only the introductory courses. I wouldn't even want to do the biochem classes. They're considered some of the hardest to do.)

Exactly. I have had people ask me, in all seriousness, why they haven't seen cats give birth to puppies. They want to know why there are still monkeys around if humans evolved out of monkeys. Not all opponents to evolution are this naive of course, but there is a surprising amount of this going on. Then from there it is a huge upward battle. You have to try to explain genetics and inheritance, the statistics of populations and genes and so on. Then, you have to try to explain how the fossil record fits in wtih all of this, geology, radiometric testing, phylogenetic trees, and why bacteria evolving new traits in the lab counts as evolution just as much as something that would be a gross morphological trait. Like you said, getting to the point of understanding that stuff (and I am not an expert here by any means!) takes effort. If someone isn't inclined to understand or put forth the effort, what can you do? It's difficult to know how to approach this.

 

[brokensymmetry]

There are still people who reject that the Earth is spherical.



Unfortunately, there will always be people who don't base their views on facts and evidence, no matter how clearly, simply, and succinctly you state it. Of course, there will also always be people that are simply incapable of comprehending certain things - evolutionary theory clearly being an example of this.

Sure, but a very small number of people are flat earth. A very small number are geocentrists. There is a relatively large number who reject evolution and that is a potential problem for everyone. As I stated in my post to Ouroboros I agree there is a challenge if people just outright don't want to change their minds or think through the issue, but I can't help but think more could be done.

 

[brokensymmetry]

Like most other scientists "evolutionary scientists" aren't all that concerned about lay people understanding them. They are more concerned with working out the issues in their particular field and presenting their findings to their peers. So, aside from science popularizers, don't look for too much from the scientists themselves.

Yeah, I agree, and this is where I think maybe the scientific community should look at itself and its public role a lot more clearly. Stats like this should be spooky enough to get people to rethink their roles. there has to be a relatively non threatening way to explain the basic concepts of evolution in a clear and friendly manner such that people who have even a little bit of interest and focus will walk away being interested.

 

[brokensymmetry]

Careful what you wish for...
The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is but a drop in the bucket. I personally enjoy Dawkin's presentation of evolution, but he has basically ensured he can't help by being so vocally anti religious- most people are religious to some extent, the large majority even. The people who are going to be able to make an impact this way will manage to not comment on religion, or make briefly positive comments about how evolution need not interfere with religious belief etc., and then focus on a friendly presentation of the evidence. Dawkins makes the situation worse in some regards in terms of the public perception of evolution.

 

[brokensymmetry]

What is going on with these people?

How about this: They do not like you. They do not like people like you. They do not like the things you believe in. They think that you are evil and for good reason.

They are merely considering the source. They reject the theory of evolution not because they reject science, they reject it because they reject everything certain people in the other side of political stand for, so what we get is guilt by association. They believe that you are trying to destroy them and their way of life, and to them that is threatening. So why wouldn't they reject the things you try to push on them?

I agree there is this sort of complication in terms of identifying the scientific establishment with a push for naturalism in general. This is where I think scientists could do better at focusing on the relevant scientific theories in the public sphere, as representatives of scientific knowledge. Evolution is a fact about the world, but how many people do you run into who insist that it is 'just a theory' and there is this other way of thinking about things that is equally as valid? I think it is precisely because evolution has gotten tied up with naturalism, with atheism, and since atheism and naturalism are philosophical 'choices' so evolution must be also.

 

[1robin]

What is going on with these people?

How about this: They do not like you. They do not like people like you. They do not like the things you believe in. They think that you are evil and for good reason.

They are merely considering the source. They reject the theory of evolution not because they reject science, they reject it because they reject everything certain people in the other side of political stand for, so what we get is guilt by association. They believe that you are trying to destroy them and their way of life, and to them that is threatening. So why wouldn't they reject the things you try to push on them?

I like your avatar. What is it?

There are all types of people on both sides. A monk first came up with the idea things evolve, the son of a minister confirmed it, Christians believe in it to varying degrees, and the bible foretold it, 4000 years ago. I do not think that Christians on one side are hating a side that also contains many Christians. I think there are so many holes in a GODLESS explanation for the totality of genetic history that any honest man would reserve judgment.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Sure, but a very small number of people are flat earth. A very small number are geocentrists. There is a relatively large number who reject evolution and that is a potential problem for everyone.

The point was that no matter how ridiculous an idea is, there will always be people who believe it. Or no matter how factual something is, there will always be people who don't believe it.

As I stated in my post to Ouroboros I agree there is a challenge if people just outright don't want to change their minds or think through the issue, but I can't help but think more could be done.

The problem isn't a lack of information available regarding evolution, but rather that certain religious elements have marketed evolution as anti-god and anti-religion, so many people will never be open to learning about it or accepting it.

Just look at the number of regular RF posters who have been presented with endlesss mountains of scientific/empirical evidence regarding evolution, along with clear, succinct, and straightforward explanations of the mechanisms involved, and it still has no impact on their irrational rejection of evolutionary biology.

 

[brokensymmetry]

The point was that no matter how ridiculous an idea is, there will always be people who believe it. Or no matter how factual something is, there will always be people who don't believe it.



The problem isn't a lack of information available regarding evolution, but rather that certain religious elements have marketed evolution as anti-god and anti-religion, so many people will never be open to learning about it or accepting it.

Just look at the number of regular RF posters who have been presented with endlesss mountains of scientific/empirical evidence regarding evolution, along with clear, succinct, and straightforward explanations of the mechanisms involved, and it still has no impact on their irrational rejection of evolutionary biology.

Alright, I agree that there are many who are going to be like this, but does that represent everyone who has doubts about evolution? I suspect that a lot of people are just exposed to the rhetoric and think 'well, evolution is *just* a theory after all!'. These sorts of people may be persuaded if exposed to a clear and easy to understand presentation. I think this sort of thing is lacking in the sciences in general. Since we can't get rid of anti evolution leaders, I suggest we mount a more effect defense.