Poll: Most Republicans Reject Evolution

(AP)  The three Republican presidential candidates who indicated last month that they do not believe in evolution may have been taking a safe stance on the issue when it comes to appealing to GOP voters.

A Gallup poll released Monday said that while the country is about evenly split over whether the theory of evolution is true, Republicans disbelieve it by more than 2-to-1.

Republicans saying they don't believe in evolution outnumbered those who do by 68 percent to 30 percent in the survey. Democrats believe in evolution by 57 percent to 40 percent, as do independents by a 61 percent to 37 percent margin.

The poll also said that those who go to church often are far likelier to reject evolution than those who do not. Republicans are likelier than Democrats or independents to attend church services, according to Frank Newport, editor in chief of the Gallup Poll.

At the GOP's first presidential debate last month, the 10 candidates were asked which of them did not believe in evolution. Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo raised their hands.

The Gallup survey, conducted May 21 to 24, involved telephone interviews with 1,007 adults. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

[reel-crazy]

Fossil

enough said...

[abbe7]

"But it can take as little as 30 days to evolve fruit flies, a much less complex creation and has been done multiple times in labs. Just ask and biology grad student."
Posted by wfbdem at 09:19 AM : Jun 13, 2007

A key point ... and you could have added HIV, flu ... I'm not sure we have old flu vaccines in excess, but creationists could use them ...

[gunnerv1]

I don't reject it and I'm a Republican from the deep South.

[randalds]

Posted by kansas1946 at 12:26 AM : Jun 14, 2007

The problem is, of course, that fundamentalist creationists don't believe the world is more then 6,000 years old, so to argue with them in terms of 100's of millions of years is an exercise in futility. The newly opened creationism museum for instance holds that dinosaurs were alive during the time of early mankind in the bible (in the Garden of Eden) and in fact were actually on the Ark. They also state that all of the early animals (dinosaurs too) were herbivores in the Garden of Eden and didn't start eating each other until after God kicked Adam and Eve out. How does one rationally argue with such insanity? I don't bother to try to any longer.

[kansas1946]

"It is at odds with the bible, because the bible states that death entered the world when man sinned. Evolution is based upon the survival of one creature at the demise of another creature. This is in direct conflict with what Christians believe (those who put their trust in the bible)."
**************************************
This is why we are having trouble defending Darwin's theory of evolution. Most people who argue with it, don't even know what it is, and don't think when they criticize it. I always ask anyone who disagrees with evolution to find me a horse fifty million years ago. Any fossel of any horse that you could recognize. Find me a bird 100 million years ago. Any fossel of any bird. Find me a ****-sapien 80 million years ago. Any fossel of any ****-sapien. Find me a fossel of a flower 200 million years ago. Any fossel of any flower. No. Then where did those things come from. The weren't here then. So something must have changed. Evolution only means "change through time" and Darwin's theory was his effort to explain the change through natural selection.

[randalds]

Lenin and Stalin were both Russian Orthodox (Stalin studied for the priesthood, though only to please his mother) and Hitler was a Catholic. I've never heard of any of them saying anything whatsoever about evolution.

[cfin5]

Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler were evolutionists too.

[pakaal]

Evolution is a fraud.... this sends the libtard atheists apoplectic because the dhimmicrats think they are the smartest people in the room. Yeah, real smart...believing that reptile scales magically morphed into flight-worthy feathers is sooooo scientific. Please.
Posted by jht3810 at 09:26 PM : Jun 13, 2007

You should spend less time coming up with pithy insults and more time actually reading some books on science, like the ones that describe how scales, feathers and scutes (oh, my!) are identical in composition and location on the respective DNA strand, or how scutes have been demonstrated to develop into feathers using inhibitor viruses. So scientific indeed. Perhaps that's why you're having so much trouble with it.

Sorry to tell you jht3810, but mocking the truth doesn't make it go away, it just makes you look ignorant.

[jht3810]

Evolution is a fraud that is a disgrace to real sciences like physics and chemistry. But of course this sends the libtard atheists apoplectic because the dhimmicrats think they are the smartest people in the room. Yeah, real smart...believing that reptile scales magically morphed into flight-worthy feathers is sooooo scientific. Please.

[sy2502]

ctthorne,
what part of "I do not believe in a personal god" didn't you understand?