Slashdot Mirror


Americans' Evolution Knowledge Isn't That Bad, If You Ask About Elephants (sciencemag.org)

sciencehabit writes: In 2014, a poll showed that just 49% of Americans agreed with the statement: "Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals." But it's difficult to tell whether those numbers measure ignorance about science, because belief in human evolution is closely tied to religious belief, especially in the United States. Yesterday, researchers at the annual meeting of AAAS, previewed data from a recent poll showing that when the word "human" is replaced with "elephant" in the evolution question, 75% of Americans agree — about 25 percentage points higher than before. Plus, the new elephant question does a better job of predicting general science knowledge than the human question, especially among those who say they don't believe in evolution. So it seems that America's dismal performance on past evolution polls can be blamed at least partially on this disbelief, rather than a lack of knowledge.

14 of 385 comments (clear)

  1. Still bad by slashping · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The 75% number about elephants is still shockingly bad.

    1. Re:Still bad by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What result are we striving for? And, most importantly, how will achieving that result affect our scientific output?

      It's not just about scientific output; it's also about the ability to act usefully based on the science.

      As an obvious example, far too many decisions in government get their public support from rhetoric, short term greed, or fear. Far too few get supported by the public based on evidence and critical thinking. This can and does lead to objectively harmful actions becoming official policy.

      The chilling part of the problem is that it's also a vicious circle. When few in power even understand basic STEM issues themselves, and government is responsible for areas like education and a lot of large-scale funding, you risk a creeping decline in education and awareness that in turn makes other problems worse.

      This seems to be a particularly unfortunate situation in the US today, because its sheer scale and willingness to deploy its military power mean it's unrealistic for the rest of the world to challenge it effectively on issues like, say, wasteful use of natural resources or excessive use of antibiotics, where the consequences can go far beyond the national borders even if the accountability does not.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  2. Religion is poison by roman_mir · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Religion is poison for the mind, it is arsenic, meth, cocaine and cyanide of the mind, it is the murderer of intelligence, destroyer of sound logic and of critical thought.

    Of-course people are free to believe whatever they want to believe, but I think it is fair to treat all religions and supernatural belief systems, so called 'spirituality' as toxins that destroy thinking abilities in ways that may be even worse than simple narcotics.

    1. Re:Religion is poison by ranton · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but I think it is fair to treat all religions and supernatural belief systems, so called 'spirituality' as toxins that destroy thinking abilities in ways that may be even worse than simple narcotics.

      You do know that many proponents of different religions actually accept evolution don't you? Acceptance of evolution by religious groups.

      Your gross generalization is more indicative of the poisoning of your own mind than of anything else.

      While I don't agree with the original post, you do realize he never said religion is poison solely because of the rejection of evolution by many religious people, don't you? Your gross mis-characterization of his statements put you in a poor position to criticize his argument. He was referring to just one instance of what he feels is religion poisoning minds, not the only instance.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    2. Re:Religion is poison by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You think that's trolling but a lot of us share that point of view.

    3. Re: Religion is poison by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What about gay people? What about dangerous ideologies of a political party and people being brainwashed to vote against things like healthcare or deaths in wars?

      How is that good?

      Denying science is dangerous too. Preventing sex education is harmful.

    4. Re:Religion is poison by wisesifu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How can faith be tested by skepticism? Isn't faith the belief in something without proof?

      faith
      noun
      1.
      complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

      2.
      strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

      Even its definition counters your statement. It seems perhaps that you may be confused as to what faith is.

  3. Re:"Belief" in Evolution required for Gravity Wave by slashping · · Score: 4, Insightful

    politically-correct "belief" in evolution

    There's nothing political about it. Just cold hard science. And the same applies to global warming.

  4. Re:It matters? by slashping · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Other people's choices are not your choices.

    Other people's choices affect my life and health, so I prefer that these are well informed.

  5. Re:"Belief" in Evolution required for Gravity Wave by ranton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Second, of all, a vague profession of "belief" in Evolution* is being made into a nonsensical substitute for OMG IF YOU FAIL THIS TEST THEN YOU HAVE REJECTED ALL SCIENCE FOREVER.

    Riddle me this, please tell me how failure to profess the politically-correct "belief" in evolution means you can't do any of the following: 1. Design nanoscale materials. 2. Detect gravitational waves. 3. Successfully perform brain surgery. 4. Sucessfully launch a spacecraft.

    None one credible would claim religious belief prevents successful scientific research. Most significant scientific research up until perhaps 50-100 years ago was performed by religious people. The questions is whether this religious belief slows or prevents some scientific research that would have been successful if not for religion.

    Neil Degrasse Tyson gave an arguably perfect lecture describing the dangers of religious convictions affecting the scientific research. One of his best examples was of the scientist he respects the most: Isaac Newton. Even one of the greatest scientists of all time limited the scope of his research once he decided only God could describe the movement of celestial bodies.

    If celestial mechanics can be affected by the same religious belief that encourages the rejection of evolution, there are probably no fields of science that cannot be affected.

    Successfully perform brain surgery.

    I hope the success of a weak minded man like Ben Carson in the field of neurosurgery is enough to show that field has far more to do with hard work than it does with the kind of rational thought necessary for scientific research. Just because neurosurgeons are highly paid does not mean they should be confused with neuroscientists.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  6. Parrots by jklovanc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The difference between the "humans" and the "elephants" answers shows that 50% of the "creationists" are just parroting the church's views when talking about humans but when they put their mind in gear, as in the "elephant" question, that actually believe in evolution.

  7. Re:It matters? by Passman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Polling data matters? How so? And why is it your business whether someone else makes "informed" choices or "uninformed" choices? Other people's choices are not your choices.

    If the people making "uninformed" choices are in power or can influence those in power, then they can prevent me from making my "informed" choice and leave my with no choice.

    That matters.

    --
    Minne-snow-da: Winter is comming...
  8. Re:"Belief" in Evolution required for Gravity Wave by DoctorNathaniel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Right. You either accept evidence and rational thought as your foundation for how the universe really operates, or you are fundamentally in an inconsistent position.

    If you decide that evolution 'just doesn't make sense to you', and is therefore false, then you should probably say the same about quantum mechanics... and by extension, you should not believe in the operation of a transistor, and by extension not believe in your own cell phone

    Hypocrisy of this kind is very common, largely because people don't connect the dots.. but the dots are connected. To do otherwise is to be like a person who uses Galileo and Newton's theories about motion to predict where a cannonball will land, but denies heliocentrism.

  9. Doublethink by Noughmad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a textbook example of doublethink. Nobody actually believes that elephants have evolved over millions of years, but Adam was just put there. So apparently a quarter of people have an inconsistent belief system, or just two conflicting ones - let's say one from school and one from church - without realizing it. I'm sure if they were confronted with this, they would make some sort of excuses or explanations.

    --
    PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.