http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/

Less than half of republicans believe evolution, and the number of republicans accepting evolution has actually decreased over the past 3 years.

The democrats have risen to 67% almost on par with college educated demographic (still lower than it needs to be).

Pretty sad that people, especially the party that controls half the government, is so I'll-informed on this issue.

Is there anything that can be done? How has our education failed so badly? How has the media failed so badly? Is there anything that can be done to make republicans smarter? Is this backlash against science progressing to quickly?

12/31/2013 2:33:54 AM

Hmm, similar to the backlash against grammar?

12/31/2013 3:41:24 AM

middle and high school science has failed by not adequately teaching people what theory means and how theory as a scientific term is very different from theory in other uses. if they very clearly explained that a theory can never become a law, it would help a lot.

12/31/2013 9:13:37 AM

religious people are fucking dumb

12/31/2013 9:42:52 AM

Quote :

"and the number of republicans accepting evolution has actually decreased over the past 3 years."

probably because reasonable people have been leaving the Republican party and no longer self-identify as Republicans

12/31/2013 9:44:16 AM

Quote :

"middle and high school science has failed by not adequately teaching people what theory means and how theory as a scientific term is very different from theory in other uses. if they very clearly explained that a theory can never become a law, it would help a lot."

this is taught extensively.

Quote :

"Is there anything that can be done? How has our education failed so badly? "

failure? science teachers aren't hired to make people believe in one thing or the other. science is a process, not a belief.

12/31/2013 9:53:31 AM

Quote :

"this is taught extensively."

its apparently not taught well or clearly enough, did you miss the first post of this thread?

12/31/2013 9:58:13 AM

all the science in the world won't change a lot of peoples religious beliefs.

12/31/2013 10:14:12 AM

parents are gonna have more of an impact on most kids belief systems and you really arent gonna defeat years of religious garbage with an hour of science 5 times a week.

12/31/2013 10:25:59 AM

There's a growing group of people rejecting partisan politics. I won't pigeonhole this group's beliefs, but the people that are holding onto party ties are, not surprisingly, more stubborn and less likely to adopt new views than their non-partisan peers. Parties are a tribe, and in a tribe it doesn't pay to take an unconventional view. That's my theory, at least.

The obvious question is how these non-partisan will engage the electoral system. Do they pick one of the two major party candidates? Do they pick some fringe third party candidate? Do they disengage entirely? The answers matters a little, but they won't change some of the underlying beliefs that enable anti-scientific thinking. It isn't possible to vote this cultural shift into existence.

I don't think religion is all to blame, either. The explanation is at least partially political. A lot of bad policy has been crafted in the name of "science", so the reactionary, conservative wing of the GOP digs its heels in and, in some cases, becomes anti-scientific.

Quote :

"parents are gonna have more of an impact on most kids"

Mainly this, though.

[Edited on December 31, 2013 at 10:31 AM. Reason : ]

12/31/2013 10:31:15 AM

there are also loads of anti-science folks in the democratic party (anti-nuclear/anti-gm crops types), so its not purely religious but its pretty close.

regarding where those 3rd parties go, atleast here in maine we elected an independent, former governor to the senate. In the last governors race we almost elected another independent governor, but the democrats ran a total failure that sucked up idiot party ticket voters, so we got a republican. it looks like its gonna happen again this year, so we'll see if the independent can draw more votes away from the republicans. if not, then im sure the current gov will get reelected.

12/31/2013 10:56:15 AM

Quote :

"but the democrats ran a total failure "

in all fairness, the previous total failure they ran became Governor

12/31/2013 11:03:13 AM

yeah that's true. oh god was he so bad.

like our current gov is weird too. I like some of his ideas, but others are just retarded. the democratic party in maine is really bad and pretty much only understands how to get out the national talking points, so its hilarious when the gov trolls the shit out of them and they get all flabbergasted cause the only thing they can do is regurgitate more talking points.

my biggest worry is that the democrats are gonna run someone slightly more competent than last time which means an even bigger chance to split the vote and the gov is gonna get re-elected.

12/31/2013 11:35:20 AM

Quote :

"he"

he? she.

12/31/2013 11:51:53 AM

Quote :

" Hmm, similar to the backlash against grammar? "

This is apples fault, the iOS keyboard sucks :-(

But I wonder if the fact that technology makes it's easier now to find news sources/blogs that conform to your pre existing ideas and reinforce them? And how much of this retrograde can be attributed to Fox News?

12/31/2013 11:52:10 AM

our last gov was a dude (I live in maine).

12/31/2013 11:52:42 AM

Quote :

"And how much of this retrograde can be attributed to Fox News?"

i think its the media at large, not just Fox. There is this harmful belief that you need to give both sides of any issue equal time even if one side has no merit.

12/31/2013 11:55:49 AM

certainly on the internet there are loads of hugboxes you can goto to reinforce your ideology, but I don't think theres really another equivalent to fox news. Most of the other major news orgs are just incompetent, rather than pandering to a specific belief system

[Edited on December 31, 2013 at 12:05 PM. Reason : a]

12/31/2013 12:04:56 PM

but they all perpetuate an equivalency that is not there by giving time to talking heads from both sides of issues when sometimes one side has no merit and deserves no time (e.g. Katie Couric perpetuating the HPV vaccine risk myths)

12/31/2013 12:41:08 PM

Quote :

"failure? science teachers aren't hired to make people believe in one thing or the other. science is a process, not a belief."

Yes, but only a broken (or complete lack of a) process could lead to a rejection of evolution in favor of Creationism.

Quote :

"The obvious question is how these non-partisan will engage the electoral system. Do they pick one of the two major party candidates? Do they pick some fringe third party candidate? Do they disengage entirely?"

For my part, I have mostly just disengaged, with a degree of picking fringe 3rd party candidates. I vote in GOP primaries if there's anyone worth a shit. I vote Libertarian from time to time when (as typical) there isn't a tolerable GOP candidate, and the (L) candidate isn't full-retard--when they put up an (L) from the fringe, then fuck them, too.

Since the (R) is usually intolerable and the (L) is usually full-retard, I do a lot of abstaining and writing in "no-confidence" where write-ins are available. I've done that for probably about a decade now. In a sense, I'm not at all disengaged, in that I stay in-the-know and vote in primaries and off-cycle years, but on the other hand, I diligently vote for "fuck you" more often than I actually vote for anyone. I'm not at all disengaged in the sense that I'm paying close attention, waiting right on the sidelines, eagerly awaiting a chance to actually rejoin the process.

Quote :

"I don't think religion is all to blame, either. The explanation is at least partially political. A lot of bad policy has been crafted in the name of "science", so the reactionary, conservative wing of the GOP digs its heels in and, in some cases, becomes anti-scientific."

Yeah, that chicken & egg perspective has some degree of validity, I think.

Quote :

"there are also loads of anti-science folks in the democratic party"

I would agree, not to mention the anti-economics (soft-science) types, who don't recognize many of their desired policies as a measured trade off with economic penalties, but view them as a free lunch.

I will say, as a registered Republican, that the Dems don't suffer from as severe of an explicit, institutional distrust of or even disdain for science and even broader academia.

Quote :

"i think its the media at large, not just Fox. There is this harmful belief that you need to give both sides of any issue equal time even if one side has no merit."

Agreed on both points, and I would add that even when both sides have validity, we have this perverse tendency to showcase representatives of the opposing lunatic fringes, because I guess that manufactured conflict makes for better TV, maybe? Maybe it's the scourge of "reality TV" metastasizing even into our news.

Quote :

"certainly on the internet there are loads of hugboxes you can goto to reinforce your ideology, but I don't think theres really another equivalent to fox news. Most of the other major news orgs are just incompetent, rather than pandering to a specific belief system"

Bullshit, MSNBC has become every bit as bad as FNC. They used to be the best of the 3, maybe a decade ago...but they are every last bit as bad as Fox now.

[Edited on December 31, 2013 at 2:47 PM. Reason : ]

12/31/2013 2:46:45 PM

Quote :

"Bullshit, MSNBC has become every bit as bad as FNC. They used to be the best of the 3, maybe a decade ago...but they are every last bit as bad as Fox now."

I don't watch any cable news, but when I do catch some in public places, it's universally terrible. Id argue though it was the success of Fox News that caused the other agencies to shift towards commentators and "sports style" reporting.

My major issue with the cable news shows is that the "reporters" interview any crank, let them spout complete idiocy, but perform absolutely no fact checking of their comments. They aren't knowledgable enough to call their guests idiots in real-time.

12/31/2013 3:26:46 PM

I think that CNN is a meaningful step less far down the ladder than the other 2, but the format still sucks.

12/31/2013 3:43:43 PM

Cable "news" channels are atrocious pretty much across the board, and may in fact induce vomiting and severe seizures with long term exposure.

It's still fascinating that in 2013 it's still misunderstood that the Big Bang Theory (no millenials, not the show with the dumb blonde broad and the nerds) and "evolution" are actually two separate ideas. It's just unfortunate that "evolution" and Big Bang Theory are used interchangeably. The general idea of evolution and creationism aren't even mutually exclusive. Evolution is proven beyond guesses and theories, in that it's actually been observed and documented. The beginning of it all is where the real split is. I believe in creationism's basic tenant that God created everything in the starting palette of the universe. I'm of the thought that even if things originally started with an explosion of sorts as we would describe it (a la Big Bang Theory), it was caused by God and not some random event.

I'll be frank - I don't have physical proof of my belief. I can still accept and believe what has been scientifically observed and proven. The two don't actually disprove one another. What people choose to believe about how and why the existence of the universe came into being creates the rift.

12/31/2013 4:21:04 PM

Evolution is proven beyond guesses and theories

12/31/2013 10:32:38 PM

eh okay

12/31/2013 11:01:25 PM

I would caution folks against using the word "proved" in a science discussion if you wish for it to remain legitimate.

I am curious if anyone in this thread, reading or posting, doesn't acknowledge the merits of Darwinian and non-Darwinian evolution. If there are, then I whole-heartedly encourage them to go out and use the scientific method to disprove it.

1/1/2014 10:05:32 AM

is it not a proven that evolution takes place?

[Edited on January 1, 2014 at 10:31 AM. Reason : ]

1/1/2014 10:30:51 AM

This isn't exclusive to evolution. It's about saying something is ever "proved" in science. Things are only disproven.

1/1/2014 11:15:25 AM

then it was legitimate. carry on.

1/1/2014 12:01:49 PM

"it's just a theory"

1/1/2014 12:22:35 PM

wow it's like Smath74 is a liberal

1/1/2014 1:58:38 PM

what do you mean?

1/1/2014 3:29:42 PM

You understand that saying that evolution is a theory is nothing like saying it's something made up by people who hate God and want to destroy the American family or something like that.

1/1/2014 4:18:36 PM

i don't think that's a liberal thing. more like a reasonable understanding of the nature of science. (and the science definition vs the colloquial definition of "theory")

1/1/2014 4:32:47 PM

haha, but those things are somehow becoming at least a somewhat of a liberal vs conservative thing.

1/1/2014 4:48:28 PM

Quote :

"a reasonable understanding"

a.k.a. "a liberal thing"

1/1/2014 6:16:51 PM

1/1/2014 6:27:05 PM

read the first post then come back and roll your eyes again

1/1/2014 6:34:03 PM

1/1/2014 6:51:14 PM

Quote :

"middle and high school science has failed by not adequately teaching people what theory means and how theory as a scientific term is very different from theory in other uses. if they very clearly explained that a theory can never become a law, it would help a lot."

I like how the OP goes straight to our education system. No matter what is taught at school, impressionable children and going to go home and tell their parents what they've learned that day, and the parent, if they believe in creationism, will probably call bullshit and "set the child straight."

Stop blaming educators. Wanna blame Christians and Republicans, fine, but the educators are doing what they can.

PS I'm excluding Christian private schools, I'm sure they're teaching straight up creationism there.

1/1/2014 10:41:39 PM

^yes, private christian schools DO teach creationism as science. One of the (many) reasons i'm against public money going towards vouchers - our tax dollars should not be funding religious education indoctrination.

message_topic.aspx?topic=638385

I have a buddy (suitemate in wood hall back in the day) who went to a private christian high school in the area and he asked me what evolution even was... they didn't even mention it in science class at the school he went to.


[Edited on January 1, 2014 at 10:50 PM. Reason : ]

1/1/2014 10:50:32 PM

Lots of kids, most in fact, eventually drift from their parents. With good education, kids would learn. And it's not like Christian creationism has anywhere near a shred of validity to challenge evolution. The evidence is overwhelming.

I recalls AP biology teacher tacitly pushing creationism (2002 era). I guess there's not much you can do about teacher bias, in this social atmosphere.

Perhaps if the curriculums were clearer though...?

1/1/2014 10:51:25 PM

Quote :

"One of the (many) reasons i'm against public money going towards vouchers - our tax dollars should not be funding religious education indoctrination. "

Vouchers and creationism need not be a package deal.

Quote :

"I like how the OP goes straight to our education system. No matter what is taught at school, impressionable children and going to go home and tell their parents what they've learned that day, and the parent, if they believe in creationism, will probably call bullshit and "set the child straight." Stop blaming educators. Wanna blame Christians and Republicans, fine, but the educators are doing what they can. "

It may be true that they're doing what they can. If we had, in aggregate, better teachers, though, what they could do would be better. Part of the problem is the flaccid, rote, lowest-level teaching we engage in. If we taught students how to think, and if we taught more than the most superficial understanding of science, and specifically showed when teaching evolution how it is an intersection of geology, anthropology, genetics, astronomy, physics, etc. It's not a matter of a possibility of us being wrong about an aspect of biology; refuting evolution would require our misunderstanding of a whole bunch of widely varied scientific disciplines.

1/2/2014 12:29:15 AM

Quote :

"Vouchers and creationism need not be a package deal."

In practice, especially in small-town America, nearly all the established schools ready to lap up the voucher money will be Christian schools.

[Edited on January 2, 2014 at 3:30 AM. Reason : This is why conservatives love vouchers: Their ideal of school "choice" is all religious schools.]

1/2/2014 3:28:56 AM

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=178&f=2531&t=12367512

1/2/2014 3:32:32 AM

I wish that more Muslim schools would come out in support of vouchers, that's all that is needed to kill it

1/2/2014 9:38:14 AM

1/2/2014 12:46:17 PM