home
RSS
Survey: Nearly half of Americans subscribe to creationist view of human origins
June 1st, 2012
03:46 PM ET

Survey: Nearly half of Americans subscribe to creationist view of human origins

By Dan Merica, CNN

(CNN) - Forty-six percent of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years, according to a survey released by Gallup on Friday.

That number has remained unchanged for the past 30 years, since 1982, when Gallup first asked the question on creationism versus evolution. Thirty years ago, 44% of the people who responded said they believed that God created humans as we know them today - only a 2-point difference from 2012.

"Despite the many changes that have taken place in American society and culture over the past 30 years, including new discoveries in biological and social science, there has been virtually no sustained change in Americans' views of the origin of the human species since 1982," wrote Gallup's Frank Newport. "All in all, there is no evidence in this trend of a substantial movement toward a secular viewpoint on human origins."

The second most common view is that humans evolved with God's guidance - a view held by 32% of respondents. The view that humans evolved with no guidance from God was held by 15% of respondents.

Survey: U.S. Protestant pastors reject evolution, split on Earth's age

Not surprisingly, more religious Americans are more likely to be creationists.

Nearly 70% of respondents who attend church every week said that God created humans in their present form, compared with 25% of people who seldom or never attend church.

Among the seldom church-goers, 38% believe that humans evolved with no guidance from God.

The numbers also showed a tendency to follow party lines, with nearly 60% of Republicans identifying as creationists, while 41% of Democrats hold the same beliefs.

Republicans also seem to be more black-and-white about their beliefs, with only 5% responding that humans evolved with some help from God. That number is much lower than the 19% of both independents and Democrats.

According to Newport, a belief in creationism is bucking the majority opinion in the scientific community - that humans evolved over millions of years.

"It would be hard to dispute that most scientists who study humans agree that the species evolved over millions of years, and that relatively few scientists believe that humans began in their current form only 10,000 years ago without the benefit of evolution," writes Newport. "Thus, almost half of Americans today hold a belief ... that is at odds with the preponderance of the scientific literature."

The USA Today/Gallup telephone poll was conducted May 10-13 with a random sample of 1,012 American adults. The sampling error is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

- Dan Merica

Filed under: Belief • Creationism • evolvution

soundoff (3,830 Responses)
  1. Cyle

    This is a direct result of our poor educational system. I weep for the future.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
    • RapidOne

      Why do you think Republicans always GUT education? These 46% of mor0ns are the voters they continue to create through fear, hate and ignorance. What a remarkable strategy, not to mention: WE'RE F-ED!

      Lol, sad...

      June 1, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
    • Alex Gessong

      @Cycle: not really. The education system does not teach creationism, even though Ronald Reagan said that it should. People believe in magical things like creationism because they're afraid not to. The human brain is an amazing thing, but some people choose not to use it for much.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
    • roccop777

      You claim that many reject the theory of evolution as a plausible explanation for the source of life forms, because of a "poor educational system". It appears what you desire is a better propaganda system. Presently in the U.S. the only explanation legally allowed to be taught to explain for the origin of life (abiogenesis, often referred to as "chemical evolution") and the variety of life forms is evolution. What more do you want? If the theory of evolution can't convince people in spite of having an uncontested monopoly in the schools, then have you considered that it could be because the theory is fundamentally flawed and unbelievable?
      I grew up believing the theory of evolution - because it was the only side I was allowed to be taught. However when I later began doing more in depth research on my own I discovered how fluid/flip-floppity and unfalsifiable the evidence base is for this theory.
      Back when I was in school we were taught that a long list of useless, vestigial organs were evidence pointing to evolution “That's what we would expect to find if evolution is true”, we were told. Two years ago, the last two “vestigial organs” were removed from the list and now I have heard biologists declare: “all organs have a function – that's what one would expect if evolution is true” – so no matter what the facts are, evolutionists can make it fit with their ideology.
      Now I know I'll probably be blasted as an ignoramus for having the gall to doubt evolution - however let me explain that for the past 11 years I have lived in Jena, the city through which Darwinism entered Germany, via Ernst Haeckel. I have a good friendship with one of former East Germany's leading biologists/zoologists. He is also one of those in charge of Germany's only Evolution Museum. He has admitted to me, that after teaching a few generations of evolution biologists he is now much less convinced that the theory of evolution is a correct explanation for the origin of the various life forms.
      I have had the privilege of having exchanges with one of Germany's leading bio-chemists (who also agrees with Pasteuer that "Spontaneous generation (abiogenesis) is an illusion" - but admits he must keep that to himself, lest he be ostracized from the scientific community - as well another biochemist who shares a Nobel prize for synthesizing the B12 vitamin - but gave some surprisingly shabby and outdated arguments for abiogenesis.
      The more I learn and discover, the more I am convinced that the theory of evolution is based on ignorance of the facts and for this reason requires an educational monopoly/intellectual fascism to keep it viable.

      June 1, 2012 at 6:50 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      """I grew up believing the theory of evolution"""

      I seriously doubt it. The fact that you even use the word "believe" belies your true bias.

      Scientists don't "believe". They accept a body of evidence for various theories, and this acceptance is based on a prior knowledge of facts. Science is not a matter of faith or belief.

      To understand the sciences one needs some basic knowledge to build upon. Unfortunately, many people stop learning in high school and/or develop a habit of concrete thinking, so any new evidence which comes along is ignored. When you read a comment referring to a "missing link", that's a prime example of someone who hasn't kept up.

      Seriously, all you people need to do is read some science magazines. Scientific American may be a bit much at first but how about Popular Science, maybe? Just read. There is SO much to learn. Or are you afraid?

      June 1, 2012 at 8:54 pm |
    • iubj

      EXACTLY>... how do they explain the 25,000 year old cave paintings?

      June 2, 2012 at 12:29 am |
    • Doug

      So Jeff,

      Are you saying that scientists have no bias...no preconceived notions before they conduct an investigation? Just wondering.

      June 2, 2012 at 12:40 am |
    • Haime52

      Jeff W. – "Acceptance" is belief, no matter how much you might protest.

      June 2, 2012 at 9:17 pm |
    • galapagospete

      @Haime52: No, "acceptance" means recognizing that something is factual. "Belief" means considering something to be factual whether it is or not.

      June 3, 2012 at 4:37 pm |
  2. Cq

    This just goes to prove that you have to be educated enough in science to actually have confidence in its conclusions. It's also why so many can be convinced to trust faith healers and homeopathic "cures" instead of modern medicine. People will believe what they want to believe.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:55 pm |
    • ME II

      Good point. I guess for many people there is little difference between "believing" in religion or science.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
    • Ann

      You bring up a good point. Science actually is based on empirical observation and testing, but to those lacking a scientific background, it might look like science is just another thing to put your faith in.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:01 pm |
    • Brad

      Excuse me, but you need to be educated enough to know that there are things that man does not now, and never will, know. Had you actually bothered to read Darwin's original work, you would know that he was a believer in Theistic evolution. I hold degrees in engineering at both the Bachelors and Masters levels. Therefore, to suggest that anyone who believes in a conscience design behind the universe is either uneducated or simple is a fool. Please show me anything in the universe that progresses from an unordered to an ordered system without external intervention. The very fundamental laws of thermodynamics do not support this assertion. Please educate yourself before you attempt to insult others.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:11 pm |
    • drkent3

      Being educated is not the same as being able to think critically. What is easier to 'believe' – that the universe was unordered and over many billions of years eventually became more ordered, or that out of the blue some all knowing, all seeing, all powerful being just popped into existence and then made everything else? Just think about it for a minute.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:13 pm |
    • Jeff

      @Brad ... Actually, you've got a somewhat limited understanding of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. I too am an engineer. Perhaps you're unfamiliar with granularization and the thermodynamic "goldilocks zones" where complexity does arise. The other rather obvious fault in your argument is the "All or Nothing" paradox. Because a full understanding of the origins of all life and how they evolve into current forms isn't understood isn't available yet ... I will therefore resort to magic and completely unsupported claims. We don't have a full understanding of Cancer ... so instead of taking our most modern treatment you'd be more comfortable with a prayer and perhaps a chicken sacrifice?

      June 1, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
    • ME II

      @Brad,

      Snowflakes

      June 1, 2012 at 5:39 pm |
    • Sir Craig

      Heck, Brad, I've seen some of the ribbing scientists give engineers about how such a disproportionate number of them are creationists, which has never made sense to me, and here you show up to further give that impression. Seriously, you think a "god of the gaps" argument has ANY merit whatsoever? As for your academic credentials...trotting out the "argument by authority" fallacy is so easy to spot. There are any number of supposed PhDs out there who also believe as you do, and that doesn't make them correct or give further credence to their arguments either.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
    • Gary

      Pretty sure the First Law of Thermodynamics, is that you don't talk about Thermodynamics.

      June 1, 2012 at 6:25 pm |
    • W. R. Martin

      @Brad,
      1. Unsubstantiated assertion without evidence. What will we never know?
      2. Irrelevant. Evolution still exists, and would exist no matter what Darwin did or didn't believe.
      3. Oooh, argument from authority. Bzzzzt! Fail. We don't care how many degrees you have. And Engineer?! Creationist fodder. Case closed.
      4. Incorrect. Anyone who believes there is or ever was a conscious anything behind the design of the universe IS both uneducated and a fool. A willfully, purposefully uneducated fool at that. Shameful thing to do to a human brain.
      5. Next time you are outside during the daytime, take a peek up. That bright orange thing? There's your "very fundamental law of thermodynamics". Willfully, and purposefully foolish, ignorant and uneducated.
      6. I want to think there is an Internet law about making a fool of oneself regarding comments directed at other people's lack of education.
      F minus, minus.
      You might want to pick a better creationist website for your 'education' next time or you might end up working for a 12 year old who knows more than you ever will.

      June 1, 2012 at 6:50 pm |
    • Jonquil

      "Order" is only significant to life as we know it, Brad. Who's to say it has any relevance, whatsoever, outside of this zone of meaning? Just because things come together and result in structured and/or predictable actions, that doesn't mean such happenings were purposeful. Science is a human-made tool, not a religion.

      June 1, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
    • Empirical data vs received nonsense

      @Jonquil

      +1 Upvote for best comment of this thread.

      Perception of order is irrelevant outside of an anthropocentric frame of reference. Of course, someone may wish to take the reductio ad absurdum and claim that all physical properties are governed by a supernatural force that instructs the motion of all particles on an individual basis.

      June 1, 2012 at 10:03 pm |
    • iubj

      also just proves why these people BELIEVE that their 'gOd' tells them to be bigots towards ho mos exuals and blacks in the 60's etc etc etc etc

      June 2, 2012 at 12:32 am |
    • Cq

      Brad
      As brilliant as Darwin was anyone stuck at his level of evolution understanding today would be classified as grossly ignorant. The science of evolution has expanded so much since his day, and now includes evidence from a dozen fields including genetics that Darwin was unaware of. Even if a single fossil had never formed there would still be enough evidence to support evolution beyond any reasonable doubt.

      As a Victorian Darwin was still years behind the physics (not his field anyway) that demonstrate that a creator was not necessary, but he did struggle with the religious implications of his discovery. That's why the later printings of origins use less assured language, as a way of appeasing the religious folks who saw the danger of his discovery early on.

      June 2, 2012 at 1:14 am |
    • Cq

      Brad
      What about the laws of thermodynamics preclude evolution? We are not a closed system here on Earth. We get a constant supply of new energy from the sun which enters the food chain through photosynthesis.

      Also, wouldn't God also need an outside force to bring his "order" about, according to your logic?

      June 2, 2012 at 1:23 am |
  3. habberdash

    and they're all voting for Romney

    June 1, 2012 at 4:54 pm |
    • Kris

      Well, if he gets 41% of Democrats to vote for him perhaps future generations will have enough money for a better education.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:06 pm |
    • RapidOne

      Kris - you are one of the ignorant MOR0NS - REPUBLICANS ALWAYS GUT EDUCATION.

      Duh, read a freakin' book and you'll see the REALITY of this you worthless loser.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:17 pm |
    • Alex Gessong

      @Kris: you're deluded. Take a look at the national debt and deficit spending. Republicans were responsible for most of it. Romney would so the same as his predecessors. Ronald Reagan tripled the national debt. George W. Bush inherited a budget surplus from his Democratic predecessor and Bush turned it into a huge deficit. Deficits during Obama's term are due to Bush-era tax cuts and Bush-era wars that have cost us over a trillion dollars, and gained us nothing. Republicans like to reject reality and believe in fairy tales, so they embrace creationism. That accounts for 34% of creationists in the poll. The other 12% are the mystery. They may believe in elves, too.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  4. chill

    I'm a Christian and believe in a Creator, but clearly evolution is one of the processes by which the world He created works. That 46% of the people in the US don't understand that is sad and an indication of the, hopefully temporary, decline in our country and education.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:54 pm |
    • Brad

      That is called Theistic evolution. It does not run counter to man's minimal understanding of the universe in any way. Thinking that universe and life just happened to come into being because of an explosion is akin to believing that an explosion in a printing factory results in an unabridged dictionary.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:14 pm |
    • paulronco

      >> Thinking that universe and life just happened to come into being because of an explosion is akin to believing that an explosion in a printing factory results in an unabridged dictionary.

      This is a false analogy because it presumes that the created have anything against which to judge the order of the creation. For example, in a different universe, the result of the explosion would look like chaos to us but logic to them.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:36 pm |
  5. steve-o

    Oh my f-ing God this is nuts.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:53 pm |
    • Max in NY

      I JUST THOUGHT THE SAME THING....like ARE YOU KIDDING ME. No wonder we cant make any progress as a nation

      June 1, 2012 at 4:56 pm |
  6. J.W

    I would have thought the second most common view would have actually been the most common. I am surprised there are that many creationists.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:49 pm |
  7. JohnQuest

    Evangelical, is just pulling your chain, no one can be that naive.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:48 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      John, I was thinking the exact same thing. In reading some of these other comments, though, it's really hard to tell the spoofers from the true idiots sometimes. There are certainly some truly woefully ignorant people here.

      June 1, 2012 at 8:58 pm |
  8. bao

    48% of the US are mouth breathers who think they were made in 1 day.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:48 pm |
  9. MennoKnight

    You can argue about age but to me it is clear as day that there is purpose and design behind all that we see around us.

    It takes much more faith to believe in a universe where we are just an act of random chance.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
    • JohnQuest

      MennoKnight, not random chance.

      What you are saying is that it is easier to believe that something so powerful that lives outside our entire universe created the universe and you and cares what you eat, how you dress, who you sleep with and cares if you believe in him?

      I think it is easier to believe that we are a product of this planet and universe (hence why everything is fine tuned just for us, perfect for us to live).

      June 1, 2012 at 4:57 pm |
    • Huebert

      1. What is this purpose that you clearly see?

      2. We live in the universe. It takes zero faith to believe that it happened.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:59 pm |
    • Alex Gessong

      @MennoKnight: actually, it takes no faith at all to believe that. It only requires the rational acceptance of science and math. Given a sufficiently long time, random chaotic events will produce every possible outcome, including an orderly universe. Science and math provide proof of assertions. Religion provides no proof, which is why religion is a belief system, not a knowledge system. Science and math are knowledge systems, not faith systems.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:59 pm |
    • VanHagar

      JohnQuest...but what are the earth and universe a product of?

      June 1, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
    • MennoKnight

      John,
      "easier to believe that we are a product of this planet and universe"
      Let me push back your thinking again. Then it is still just random chance that the world came to be because it was in the solar system.
      The solar system is just the way it came to be because it was in the Milky Way.
      The Milky Way is just the way it came to be because it was in galactic cluster.
      Our galactic cluster is just the way it is because it was in our universe.
      Our universe is just he way it is because.....

      Your answer would be Random Chance.

      Mine is purposeful Creative Design.

      The further out you push the concept out the clearer the picture becomes to me that random chance just does not add up.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:12 pm |
    • drkent3

      What is more likely – that a universe of dust exploded into existence, then over many billions of years coalesced into an ordered system – or that some supernatural, all powerful being just popped into existence and created everything else? If this being didn't just pop into existence, then how did it come into being – did it evolve from something else? Claiming that evolution doesn't happen is simply lunacy, and I realize that the human race is much less intelligent than I once believed.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:17 pm |
    • MennoKnight

      Huebert,
      For one, we are having the wonderful conversation asking ourselves, how did we get here.

      Alex Gessong
      I use to think the same thing as you, but because the universe is finite it isn't old enough and large enough to meet your criteria of random chance.
      Originally the biggest opponents of the Big Bang Theory were those who wanted to rule out Creative Design because unless the Universe is eternal there is simply not enough room for random acts to cause you and me having this wonderful conversation.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:18 pm |
    • Brad

      No Menno – it takes someone with little true education and someone who is a bit too sure of themselves......

      June 1, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
    • MennoKnight

      drkent3
      "Claiming that evolution doesn't happen is simply lunacy"

      Where did I write that? Read my posts friend.

      "and I realize that the human race is much less intelligent than I once believed."
      What is with the name calling as soon as you disagree with me over something you think I said but you did not take the time to read.
      I will not call you names if you promise to not call me names. (Buthead 😉 )

      June 1, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
    • JohnQuest

      You Guys will have the same problem with God, if everything that exist has to have something to create it then your if it exist has to have something to create it. If your God can exist without a "creator" why can't the universe exist without a "creator".

      I think the evidence so far points to no God, we don't know how it all started but we have no evidence that there is a God and that a God started the universe

      June 1, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
    • MennoKnight

      JohnQuest,
      Part of my line of thinking is that the Creator exists outside of time and space.

      But then once you enter that field it is pure conjecture and it moves into reason and philosophy.

      For me the evidence points towards a creator because the design seems so strait forward and obvious.
      Occam's razor states: "Other things being equal, a simpler explanation is better than an overly more complex one."

      June 1, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
    • paulronco

      >> It takes much more faith to believe in a universe where we are just an act of random chance.

      Give amino acids 4.567 billion years, and anything is possible.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
    • Jeff

      No, you have a psychological need to believe that there is a "purpose". "That which can be asserted without evidence can be just as easily dismissed without evidence." You simply choose to ignore the evidence of evolution all around you.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:39 pm |
    • MennoKnight

      paulronco
      "Give amino acids 4.567 billion years, and anything is possible"
      Do the math. By pure random chance that is not nearly enough time.
      With Out Purpose and Design the equation does not add up.

      Jeff,
      Tell me where did I say the word Evolution in my posts?

      To me you seem to throw out all the evidence of Purpose and Design that are right in front of you because you refuse to even let that be part of the equation.
      I have let myself think of what it would look like without the equation without Intelligent Design. The problem is that the numbers just don't add up.
      I think about Intelligent Design as Einstein's Cosmological Constant. The number does not always make sense, but when plugged in it sure works.

      June 1, 2012 at 6:11 pm |
    • Gary

      It's turtles all the way down.

      June 1, 2012 at 6:28 pm |
    • iubj

      all u r doing is spewing the CHANGE u MUST create to over come the science that keeps showing u r wrong.
      scientific fact.... no dude rose from the dead unless he was a zombie of course.
      scientific fact.... no egg can be fertilized without a male injecting the seed unless u have a scientist spray it in....

      June 2, 2012 at 12:35 am |
  10. Abraham De-Lacy Giuseppe Casey Thomas O-Malley, The Alley Cat; formaly know as (Sam Yaza)

    you know theirs an ancient story about how Gaia came to us with a duty. it talks about how the trees were as big as city and we spent our life never touching the ground only living in the branches we would all still know this story if Christianity didn't come along and try to erase our history

    June 1, 2012 at 4:41 pm |
  11. Right

    How about a compromise? Maybe SOME people are from creationism and SOME people are from evoulution? My theory is as good as either of the other two.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:35 pm |
    • ME II

      Yeah.... no, it's not.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
    • Alex Gessong

      @Right: Except not. There's actual physical evidence that evolution is real. There's zero evidence that creationism is true, and there is abundant evidence that creationism is false. Creationism is myth. That doesn't mean that there is no God, it just means that creationism is not an accurate model of how things came to be. Even creationists know that evolution is real, because we can actually observe it happening. The emergence of antibiotic resistant microbes is an example of evolution at work. Humans can even drive evolution through gene-splicing. Evolution is fact. Creationism is fantasy. Anyone who believe is creationism may just as well believe in fairies and unicorns, because there's just as much evidence for them as there is for creationism. None.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
    • Jonathan

      "Even creationists know that evolution is real, because we can actually observe it happening"

      If by 'evolution', you are referring to natural selection and mutations, absolutely. There is no doubt about this happening. Creationist do, however, take exception at the claim that there is upwards movement with this method. All we have ever observed is a downwards movement, a loss of information, if you will.

      Until we can observe this upwards movement, there will always be insufficient 'evidence' to sway their belief. A shame it takes so long in order for this to occur. Makes the whole subject unverifiable and it will remain a scientific theory.

      June 2, 2012 at 12:27 pm |
  12. ME II

    Truly depressing.
    The numbers are off from last year.
    percent of God-did-its up to 46% from 40% last year,
    of God-helped down to 32% from 38%,
    and the rational people down to 15% from 16%.

    pathetic...

    June 1, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
    • craig

      It certainly takes more faith to believe we evolved , that this world and universe just came into being. that all the planets and moons had to be the exact correct distance to create tides . I believe God created the universe and he created us, in his image. Unfortunately we chose to disobey his words, and the world is suffering the consequences.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:50 pm |
    • Rich

      Could be that you're not as rational as you think you are?

      June 1, 2012 at 4:53 pm |
    • sam

      Jesus Christ, craig, it doesn't 'take more faith'. Argh, what happened to rational thought?

      June 1, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
    • Ann

      @Craig, you're either unfamiliar with the word "faith" or you're self-deceiving. Faith is believing something even without evidence that justifies the belief. Science, which includes evolution, is based on empirical observations and testing. It takes zero faith to accept evolution–the evidence is there.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:05 pm |
    • ME II

      @Craig,
      Actually, there is plenty of evidence that supports the scientific theory of evolution.

      Fossils like Tiktaalik, ambolucetus(sp?), acheoptyrx, etc.
      Biogeography like marsupials in Australia, and Americas
      Biochemistry like Cytochome C, etc.
      Genetics like Endogenous Retrovirus (ERVs), and Human Chromosome-2, etc.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:07 pm |
    • Guinness

      How does it take more faith to believe in evolution? A process that has ACTUAL evidence that it could really have happened as opposed to something that has literally zero evidence that it happened? You may not fully understand the scientific explanation as to how humans have evolved. For example, as humans moved into more dense cities/population spread of disease became easier, and yet our bodies generate stronger/quicker antibodies. Human digestive systems 200 years ago couldn't handle grain as well as we do today. Wisdom teeth, the appendix, the occycx (we're the only non-tail mammals along with apes that have this). Either god gave us an appendix (which serves no purpose other than being a ticking poison time bomb) for no reason, or we out grew the need for the organ. It used to be involved in the digestion of cellulose, but now serves no purpose.

      I would almost think that evolution makes a much better case as to why we're so complicated. Why would god care that just the right mix of DNA will give me brown eyes, and you blue eyes, but a freak mutation in that guy over there gave him one blue eye and one brown eye. Or there's a million electrical impulses and cell divisions going on in your body and just one misfire can drop you into an epileptic seizure or one renegade cell division can cause a tumor on your kidney and slowly take down the rest of your organs until it kills you. I know if I was creating a new group of people that are supposed to be made in my likeness, and I'm all powerful, I'd just make them work correctly and I wouldn't have so many glitches. It seems that a process where our bodies slowly got more complicated and better equipped may not always adapt 100% correctly, cells have the need to generate and regenerate at a much quicker rate, and therefore are more likely to mutate make more sense than a divine plan.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
    • paulronco

      >> It certainly takes more faith to believe we evolved

      No it doesn't. Evolution is a logical process. Creationism is insane.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
  13. Evangelical

    Amen. I'm glad people see science for the pack of lies that it is.

    June 1, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
    • ME II

      Science is based on evidence and facts, if you can show that the finding are wrong, write a paper and submit it to a science journal.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:21 pm |
    • Matt

      You should say that they next time you go to the doctor and ask for a vaccine. Or when you go the hospital, or when you turn on your TV, type this crap on your computer, or when you hop on a plane, or drive a car , or eat food which has been cultivated and developed by science. Everything you rely on in this world has been influenced by science to some degree....contradict yourself much?

      June 1, 2012 at 4:23 pm |
    • Huebert

      You do realize that you are using a computer?

      June 1, 2012 at 4:23 pm |
    • Honey Badger Dont Care

      Evan,

      Next time you get sick or injured please dont go to a hospital that is all sciency. Please just pray instead of having someone trained in that evil sciene use science gadgets on you and give you medicine that was developed in all kinds of sciency ways.

      Oh, and start walking to church because science developed that car. Oh, and this computer that you are using to post your idiotic messages is an evil science box too.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:25 pm |
    • Evangelical

      Don't confuse practical engineering with science. No scientist designed my computer. Engineers did.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
    • Matt

      yeah called computer engineers (just like structual enginners, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, biomedical engineers) – Engineering is a field in the Sciences...just like biology, anthropology, archeology, geology and so on....wow how ignorant are you!

      June 1, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
    • isolate

      Sounds like you'd be happier in the Dark Ages where ignorance prevailed, the Church ruled everything, people lived out their brief lives in pain, filth and disease, and scientists were burned at the stake. You and Michelle Bachmann would fit right in.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
    • Matt

      and you don't think there are computer scientists out there???!!!

      June 1, 2012 at 4:33 pm |
    • ME II

      @Evangelical,
      Don't confuse practical religion with.... oh wait...

      June 1, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
    • Evangelical

      No, engineering is practical. Science just makes "theories" (lies) like the big bang, evolution, and global warming.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
    • StandupforTruth

      @ HONEYBADGER "Next time you get sick or injured please dont go to a hospital that is all sciency. Please just pray instead of having someone trained in that evil sciene use science gadgets on you and give you medicine that was developed in all kinds of sciency ways." It was the Church that developed hospitals.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:41 pm |
    • Matt

      ahhh you mean theories like gravity? oh wait and atomic theory....oh wait here is another one electromagnitism? how about germ theory (how you get sick through germs??) .....Evan...A theory in the scientific context is simply the explanation of ALL the laws, facts & evidence without contradiction....

      Your statement shows how eneducated you are about the sciences.

      Yes engineering is practical....it is still a science.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:42 pm |
    • Abraham De-Lacy Giuseppe Casey Thomas O-Malley, The Alley Cat; formaly know as (Sam Yaza)

      soo,.. how are you enjoying your PC experience

      June 1, 2012 at 4:42 pm |
    • Apatheist

      Stop feeding the trolls.... If looks, smells, and sounds like Poe's Law....

      June 1, 2012 at 4:44 pm |
    • ME II

      ... theories like electromagnetism, gravity, germs, thermodynamics, etc.

      Engineering is APPLIED SCIENCE.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:44 pm |
    • ME II

      @Apatheist,
      Yeah, probably right.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:45 pm |
    • Jen

      Doctors are in the field of science (which you would know if you attended university). So don't go to those evil scientist doctors. If you get cancer stay home and pray. You always agree with that troll that prayer changes things so go ahead and try to prove it!

      Better headline for this article: 'US proves again why it is dead last for education out of all industrialized nations'

      June 1, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
    • Huebert

      and how much engineering do you think could be done with out physics, chemistry, biology, or mathematics?

      June 1, 2012 at 4:48 pm |
    • Josh

      Stop feeding the troll. No one can be that stupid and still use a computer.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:49 pm |
    • Apatheist

      @Josh Yep... Too few gramatical errors for a real 'evangelical'

      June 1, 2012 at 4:55 pm |
    • Jason

      Science = math, chemistry, physics, biology. Anything that can be related to those fields are the products of science.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:59 pm |
    • ERIC

      I guess you don't go to the doctor? Or use toothpaste that was created in a lab? Or use the millions of other things that only exist in our day in age because of science? Get a clue.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:00 pm |
    • sam

      Yeah, both the spelling and punctuation are too accurate for an actual evangelical, so never mind.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:03 pm |
    • Brad

      I am both a Christian and an engineer by training. Science and religion are not enemies. Science is an attempt by man to understand the universe around him. Unfortunately some Christians and some Atheists attempt to pit the two against the other. Yet both CLAIM to be in search of truth....how foolish on the part of both groups.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:18 pm |
    • drkent3

      As you type on a computer that is the product of science, and post over a network that is the product of science, and drive a car that is the product of science, and watch TV that is... maybe, just maybe you are intelligent enough to see your comment for what it is, but then – probably not.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:18 pm |
    • dman

      I bet your knuckles are pretty raw, what with you dragging them on the ground all day.

      June 1, 2012 at 7:07 pm |
    • iubj

      if science is WRONG then why do the religious nutcases keep creating different ideas to overcome what science proved.

      June 2, 2012 at 12:38 am |
  14. Doc Vestibule

    If I cut off a toe and plant it in the ground, will a perfect mate sprout up? Or does that only work with rib bones?

    June 1, 2012 at 4:11 pm |
    • StandupforTruth

      Only if you are the Lord, but you are unsure so you aren't.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:43 pm |
    • sam

      No, it only works with ribs, and then only if you water it with BBQ sauce.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:04 pm |
  15. Matthew

    Wow! This is embarrassing....

    June 1, 2012 at 4:11 pm |
    • isolate

      Not really. Half of Americans fall bellow the median score on IQ tests, too, and educational level has a lot to do with whether people accept the scientific proof of evolution or cling to the Biblical story because it's easier to understand.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:27 pm |
    • sam

      @isolate – that makes it TWICE as embarrassing.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:05 pm |
    • Jimmy

      I must of missed that day in school.There were never any facts taught about evolution, just theories. They dug up a lot of old bones but it was never connected to us, none of them. Science will correct their selves like they usually do...We just have to wait till they get the evidence they need to determine just what did happen. For now though...they are still searching for truth and there is nothing wrong with that. By the way....Did they finally find that missing link?

      June 1, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
    • Ann

      @isolate: um... Of course half of Americans fall below the average (by median I suspect you really meant average) IQ scores. That's how an average works. Regardless of what the average actually is, half of Americans will always be below it. I get what you're trying to convey, that Americans are a pretty sad bunch, but please understand what an average is.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:09 pm |
    • drkent3

      @Jimmy – yes, you missed a *lot*. Unfortunately, you are not of the mindset to actually learn all that you missed – so you will remain ignorant for the rest of your life.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      """Half of Americans fall bellow the median score on IQ tests"""

      This is a very good point. I'd wager that a high majority of those on the lagging side of the IQ Bell curve don't understand science at all and find faith far easier to adapt to their personal lives.

      June 1, 2012 at 8:41 pm |
  16. Abinadi

    I don't believe I was asked or polled...where do they get nearly half of America believes in creationism? I don't and I know most all of my friends don't and their friends and family don't....so what christian put this article on here? What a joke!!!

    June 1, 2012 at 4:07 pm |
    • Abinadi

      Oh, I see at the end of the article where they called just a little over 1000 people on the phone and asked them. SO if you believe that their statistics are right (from 1000 people...no doubt from the Southern States) then 300 MILLION people are wrong....BIGGER JOKE!

      June 1, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
    • ME II

      Go look at their methodology and get back to us on the issues with it.

      (I'm almost ashamed of the level of education on this in the American public. It's terrible.)

      June 1, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Of course the belief that Heavenly Mother and Father gave birth to Spirit Children whose choices in that past, ethereal life dicate where we wind up on Earth is much more plausible than the Genesis account.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:17 pm |
    • Mark from Middle River

      So when CNN post other articles in the Belief Blog that show some other poll that they want Atheist and the Faithful to dance too, that shows poll numbers favorible to your view, will you stand by the Christian or other Faithful that declare the poll is invaild because they were not asked?

      Abinadi.... CNN puts these poll articles out when the bloggers get quiet. Four negative ads about the Catholics barely caused a stir, so they google the net until they find a story that will have one side cheering and one side booing.

      Abinadi... we are hear for their entertainment. It does not matter if there is a God or not, ..Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Atheist, it does not matter to those on the Belief Blog.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:53 pm |
    • Jason

      Its called a scientific survey, they ask a few questions to a couple thousand random people and pool together their responses, factor in the error, then report the data.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:56 pm |
    • dave

      Recently the Pew Research Center found that only 9% of Americans respond to polls, down from 36% 15 years ago.
      http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/05/survey_bias_how_can_we_trust_opinion_polls_when_so_few_people_respond_.html

      June 1, 2012 at 5:09 pm |
    • Gary

      You can slant a phone survey any way you want just by choosing cell numbers vs. land lines. (Land lines will nearly always be creationists/Republicans.)

      June 1, 2012 at 6:36 pm |
    • Jeff Williams

      Maybe dumb people are more likely to submit to poll taking?

      June 1, 2012 at 8:44 pm |
  17. Wunk

    Awesome. Thank God

    June 1, 2012 at 4:01 pm |
  18. Jack

    We're doomed.

    June 1, 2012 at 3:59 pm |
    • Scott Petersen

      The position which fits the scientific facts most is progressive creationism. As Darwin knew, the fossil record shows species which come into existence quickly, with very few to zero "transitional animals".

      June 1, 2012 at 4:11 pm |
    • Honey Badger Dont Care

      Scott, it is clear that you have no idea how evolution works. Please stop posting idiotic statements like that. Go read a science book please.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:14 pm |
    • Jack

      If your studies of evolution ended with darwin, you should get with the century.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:15 pm |
    • ME II

      @Scott Peterson,
      few transitional fossils?
      Tiktaalik (http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/) and several of his friends disagree.
      Ambulocetus, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/life/Ambulocetus) would also have issues.
      As would Acheoptyrx, and not to mention all of out Ho.mo relatives (http://humanorigins.si.edu/) , I use "relative" loosely, of course.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
    • J.W

      I thought Scott was still in prison for murdering Lacy.

      June 1, 2012 at 4:51 pm |
  19. Huebert

    In other news 46% of Americans have an IQ below 100.

    June 1, 2012 at 3:55 pm |
    • Jonathan

      Consdering the 'average' is anywhere between 85-100, yes. But you don't need to be 'smart' to see truth.

      June 2, 2012 at 11:55 am |
  20. Reality

    What we do know: (from the fields of astrophysics, nuclear physics, geology and the history of religion)

    1. The Sun will burn out in 3-5 billion years so we have a time frame.

    2. Asteroids continue to circle us in the nearby asteroid belt.

    3. One wayward rock and it is all over in a blast of permanent winter.

    4. There are enough nuclear weapons to do the same job.

    5. Most contemporary NT exegetes do not believe in the Second Coming so apparently there is no concern about JC coming back on an asteroid or cloud of raptors/rapture.

    6. All stars will eventually extinguish as there is a limit to the amount of hydrogen in the universe. When this happens (100 trillion years?), the universe will go dark. If it does not collapse and recycle, the universe will end.

    7. Super, dormant volcanoes off the coast of Africa and under Yellowstone Park could explode catalytically at any time ending life on Earth.

    Bottom line: our apocalypse will start between now and 3-5 billion CE. The universe apocalypse, 100 trillion years?

    June 1, 2012 at 3:49 pm |
    • Wunk

      Copy and paste?

      June 1, 2012 at 4:02 pm |
    • Robert Brown

      "What we do know" Do you really know this or would it be more accurate to say "what we think based on...."?

      June 1, 2012 at 4:03 pm |
    • Reality

      As a good student, you have read the reiterations of the "fems" (flaws, errors, muck and stench) of religion. Therefore the seeds have been planted in rich soil. Go therefore and preach the truth to all nations, reiterating as you go amongst the lost, bred, born and brainwashed souls of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism as Rational Thinking makes its triumphant return all because of you!!!!

      June 1, 2012 at 4:07 pm |
    • Paul

      HERESEY BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!!

      June 1, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
    • Paul

      HERESY BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!!

      June 1, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
    • paulronco

      The volcano under Yellowstone erupts approximately once every 650,000 years. And, we're due.

      June 1, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.