A new poll asks "Do you think the thoery of Intelligent Design should be taught in our education system? Respondents to this on line poll were given the options: Yes, No, Not Sure, and What is it?
The results show that nearly 90 percent of respondents oppose teaching ID in schools.
Almost no one was unsure, and just under six percent claim to not know what ID is.
The poll was conducted by Expelled The Movement, a MySpace group.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Ah Egnor. The chief purveyor of foot-in-mouth disease at Evolution News and Views takes on Dunford's recent post on the intellectual dishonesty of the intelligent design creationist movement and shows exactly why Dunford has a point.
Intelligent design is a cheesy attempt to smear a patina of…
The Ecological Society of America has just published an article that surveys the state of science teaching in the US. Some of the results are somewhat reassuring — the majority of our college-bound high school students are at least getting exposed to evolution to some degree — but they're also…
(Via Irant). Federal Education Minister Brendan Nelson launched the Australian Science Festival with this:
Intelligent design, which is damned by critics as a front for biblical Creationism, argues that life on Earth is too complex to have evolved purely through Darwin's theory of natural…
Ross Olson of the Twin Cities Creation Science Association has sent me the results of the survey that was given at the debate. He is trying to spin it as supporting the claim that this kind of debate was "useful" — but I'm unimpressed.
About 500 people attended, 290 returned the survey. The survey…
"What is it?"
Teach the controversy! ;-D
Nice framing, Greg!
Nice framing!
------------
Btw. since "conventional wisdom" usually declares polls who are in favor of those who conducted it untrustworthy, I hereby declare this poll ultra-credible(TM)!
;)
"no" has double that, now.
"no" has double that, now.
sorry for the double post, internet hiccup.
You guys do realize that the poll was most likely spammed, though, right?
It's got over 21000 votes for "No" now.
PZ (and his machine) had nothing to do with it. Nothing at all...
-Rusty
I just watched the Ben Stein on Hannity (and Colmes), and I've got to say, Alan Colmes is such a weak arguer. He throws up his hands when Ben Stein disputes him. It would have helped if Colmes read more about the distortions that the film makes about Charles Darwin.
Still, great to see Ben Stein say it's all about religion. Makes our jobs easier.
"PZ (and his machine) had nothing to do with it. Nothing at all...
-Rusty"
It actually (at least in part) may have been some of my fellow ScienceForums.net people. But this is seriously a joint effort.
Knowing that the We of an Intelligent Mind Soul, are Beings of a ...t an Old Sold passing through, with something important to say �.�
...
Voted just now. Current results:
I think the 97% response against the teaching of ID in schools should be sent to every elected official in the US. And on an ID friendly site too! Tsk Tsk.
Of course PZ sent his readers there. But Stein and Mathis sent their readers there as well, and everyone who watched the movie and googled it online went there too.
It's ludicrous to dismiss the people sent there by PZ's blog as insignificant. In terms of organization and commitment, the numbers are on the side of science.
What people don't realize, when they see surveys that 60% or more believe in creationism, is that for the vast majority of Americans, their so-called faith is a mile wide and an inch deep. If faith became unfashionable, the average American would abandon it in a heartbeat. They may say they support ID, but only in the way they support whoever's winning on American Idol. Most people just don't care.
Most people don't feel strongly enough to vote in an online poll. And of those who do care enough, they are overwhelmingly in favor of science and secularism.
Yes: 799 (0.36%)
No: 217302 (98.62%)
Not sure: 165 (0.07%)
What is it?: 2094 (0.95%)
...Alan Colmes is such a weak arguer. He throws up his hands when Ben Stein disputes him.
Of course he does. He's not supposed to argue strongly. He's paid to pretend to play seriously, but lose to the "superior" conservative positions. He's the Washington Generals of politics.