Results of Evolution Poll(s)?

Question

Right.
4 days ago, I posed a question asking how many people believe in Neo-Darwinian Evolution. I posed this question on both the Religion & Spirituality and Biology categories, and said I'd post the results.
The Results were:

For Biology: 58% Yes, 21% No, 21% neutral
19 respondants in total.

For Religion & Spirituality: 55% Yes, 39% No, 6% neutral
32 respondants in total.

I was interested to see the proportions across the two different categories.
The proportion saying "Yes" was largely the same; the difference was in those who answered flippantly or uncertainly in the Science category. Answers like "What is that?" and "I don't know which to believe" were more common in the Biology category.

I guess that *could* be because of a more enquiring mindset... But probably not :-(

Avondrow and Ellie295:
I agree that the choice of the word "believe" for evolution is not optimal, but other ways of putting it seemed more clumsy ("take it as true", "credit as the best explanation")

Answer 1

how interesting. I would've thought it would be far more polarized.

Answer 2

I wouldn't expect there to be much difference in a yes or no response. There are *lots* of creationists who haunt the Biology forum precisely *because* they are on the lookout for questions about evolution as an effort to express their disapproval of it. I'm not disagreeing with that practice ... I'm just saying that this explains what might be an unexpected number of creationists in a science forum.

For example, I have noticed a pattern in many evolution questions ... the first 4 or 5 answers will be quick one- or two-sentence answers by creationists basically saying nothing more than "evolution is stupid" (or at most a long cut-and-paste from some creationist web site) and for the first few minutes, nothing but thumbs down for pro-evolution responses. But then after a few minutes the pro-evolution answers appear, which contain far more detail, and the thumbs down ratio reverses dramatically.

In other words, the Biology section is haunted by a lot of die-hard creationists, more than willing to give a quick "No" to evolution or anything that has the word "Darwin" in it.

I'd be curious what a poll would show in other biology-related sections (like Zoology, Botany, or even Agriculture), where the people are there for no other reason than a genuine interest in the subject.

The second problem with your poll is asking for a "belief" in "neo-Darwinism." True science lovers are very uncomfortable with the word "belief" ... as Carl Sagan once answered when pressed about whether he "believed" in extraterrestrials responded "it's not about belief, it's about evidence." Secondly, not that many people know what "neo-Darwinism" is.

It's sort of like asking "how many people believe in Mendelian genetics." Even if you take away the almost redundant word "Mendelian" ... the remaining question is "how many people believe in genetics." It's just a weird question.

I am glad you didn't just as "how many people believe in evolution" ... because that word "evolution" can also mean many things to different people (if it means the "process of slow change in a species" most people, even creationists, would say yes ... but if it means "the theory of evolution of species from common descent", then this is where the creationists would say no.)

Answer 3

That's really interesting, that close to the same number of biologists and religious/spiritual beleive the theory.
It seems to me the difference is how strongly those who don't agree feel - that is more religous respondents were actively against the theory.
I also think that perhaps it's an unfair question - a scientific theory, based on evidence from the world around us, should not have to be a matter of faith, a thing to believe in. And if the evidence starts to not support it, we can all stop thinking it's accurate.
Whereas religious belief is not about evidence, it's often about faith, and if it were 'proved' (i mean a body of evidence in support was collected) to the extent that evolutionary theory is, then it is no longer valuable to have 'faith', as believing without proofs has an intrinsic value in religion.

Answer 4

You should have included a short summary of Neo-Darwinism. I have never referred to evolution as Darwinism. It makes it sound like a cult, rather than a scientific theory. Your question may then have drawn more definite responses. The results are no surprise, but you may have had some respondents who answered in both categories. Did you exclude these duplicates?

Answer 5

Interesting, but surely the question itself contains bias, as evolution is not subject to 'belief', it is a fact evidenced by multiple sources - comparative anatomy, the fossil record, and the real clincher, comparative genetics.

Whilst the underpinning mechanism maybe the subject of healthy debate and research, the actual process is long since established.

Don't get me wrong, it is an interesting poll, and a worthwhile idea to compare responses from different categories, I just feel that there is a vague implication that evolution is faith-based!

Answer 6

Well, you can toss it all. You question is loaded and biased. It also targets a specific group not the general population. When you structure a question for polling you MUST offer alternatives.
And, you must define those alternatives. What is Neo-Darwinian Evolution, what is Creation, what are the alternatives.

Answer 7

Cool! Excelent Idea!
You should try to do it in different periods in order to get more data accuracy. Like same question,(important) same subject several times (3 or 4).
Probably i'll start to use it. Pratical and open mind!

Answer 8

It's always interesting to me to see how people react to evolution questions.