4 in 10 Americans Believe God Created Earth 10,000 Years Ago

Since we can explain what, pretty much anything is including rocks and dirt and bones. We know some certain facts that couldnt possibly 10,000 years old. yet despite is pretty rock solid, pardon the pun, evidence stating that these rocks and dirty and bones and whatever else MUST be 100,000's even million even billion years old.

God conveniently created life 10,000 years ago on a perfect rock with just the right amount of everything on it? out of the billions of planets?

I am a little surprised that not more people checked the numbers closer...

According to the Gallup poll, in 2007 39% of Americans said that creation according to the Bible such as that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" and another 27% said this is "probably true".

Which makes 66% (TWO THIRD) or 6 in 10 of Americans who more or less think that it happened like that.

This is the more astonishing since the belief "creationism is true or possibly true"...obviously requires a complete denial of science, those two things do NOT go together.

So the next time you hear someone calling a lunar eclipse a "blood moon", not knowing that the earth revolves around the sun etc..etc.. you know why. Because TWO THIRDS of Americans do not believe in science but in a religious book. And you may also possibly understand why increasingly more US companies, in very specialized high-tech sectors, NASA would be a good example, "import" and hire more and more people from overseas and not from their own country : )

When it comes to atheist I typically find a rather narcissistic attitude, and we see it throughout this thread. The whole atheist are smarter and better educated seems to be a fundamental belief among them and they have no shyness to express it every chance they get.

I always get this feeling that they talk in the Rachel Maddow style of a all knowing/insider information smile, while talking as if they are trying to explain something to a 5 years old, well unless you agree with them then it is the wink and knowing nod of the head routine. Well I also drummed up the education levels of those who believe that God had a hand in man's creation and it is not what many in this thread seem to think is reality.

We can see that a very high percentage of educated people seem to also be religious.... hmmmm

originally posted by: NoRulesAllowed
I am a little surprised that not more people checked the numbers closer...

According to the Gallup poll, in 2007 39% of Americans said that creation according to the Bible such as that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" and another 27% said this is "probably true".

Which makes 66% (TWO THIRD) or 6 in 10 of Americans who more or less think that it happened like that.

This is the more astonishing since the belief "creationism is true or possibly true"...obviously requires a complete denial of science, those two things do NOT go together.

So the next time you hear someone calling a lunar eclipse a "blood moon", not knowing that the earth revolves around the sun etc..etc.. you know why. Because TWO THIRDS of Americans do not believe in science but in a religious book. And you may also possibly understand why increasingly more US companies, in very specialized high-tech sectors, NASA would be a good example, "import" and hire more and more people from overseas and not from their own country : )

So here we go... That I'm smarter because I'm an atheist attitude.....lol

Since over 80% of Americans happen to be religious and so feel that God had a hand in man's creation you find it "astonishing"?

Oh, and because religious people feel that God had a hand in the creation of man they point at the sky with oohs and aahs saying "look blood moon" and must also think the sun orbits the earth, earth is flat, there be dragons here kind of stuff... geez...

originally posted by: Biigs
Since we can explain what, pretty much anything is including rocks and dirt and bones. We know some certain facts that couldnt possibly 10,000 years old. yet despite is pretty rock solid, pardon the pun, evidence stating that these rocks and dirty and bones and whatever else MUST be 100,000's even million even billion years old.

God conveniently created life 10,000 years ago on a perfect rock with just the right amount of everything on it? out of the billions of planets?

What does "rocks and dirty" got to do with this poll?

The poll was that people believe god had a hand in the creation of man, not "rocks and dirty" too...

a reply to: Xtrozero

" We can see that a very high percentage of educated people seem to also be religious "

There might be a logical explanation for this aka... "education " is often only the ability repeat information, word for word.

originally posted by: thedeadtruth
a reply to: Xtrozero

" We can see that a very high percentage of educated people seem to also be religious "

There might be a logical explanation for this aka... "education " is often only the ability repeat information, word for word.

Could be, but I would think that is typical for both religious or non-religious student to just regurgitate information. I can also see that a person can be quite educated without Archaeology and Anthropology as their main courses, but then the vast majority of atheist most likely do not take those courses either, so it makes one wonder where they get all their vast human evolution knowledge from...

a reply to: Xtrozero

You don't have to be an atheist to acknowledge that a belief that god created man in his/her current form 10,000 years ago is profoundly ignorant and (most importantly) wrong.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
I can also see that a person can be quite educated without Archaeology and Anthropology as their main courses, but then the vast majority of atheist most likely do not take those courses either, so it makes one wonder where they get all their vast human evolution knowledge from...

Same as everyone else. Paying attention in class, not adhering to ignorant fundamentalist beliefs, that sort of thing. I think you forget that the ignorant fundamentalists are not representative of Christianity.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The simple fact is that you can put all the information and facts in front of people that you want, but you can't make them learn if they don't want to. As a result, these idiots teach their children their ignorance and the cycle of stupid continues on. This wouldn't be such a bad thing, but the dumb people are always the loudest complainers...

And they tend to be the ones that home school too......

Just gonna throw this out there: Has anyone in this thread actually ever gone through a survey call?

I have, and by the end, pretty much had the attitude of "Yeah, sure, whatever you want to hear, phone-guy. Are we done yet, can I hang up now?"

So taking these "results" at face value is a little ridiculous. Smells like a smear attempt to stir up the pot between those with different beliefs. Maybe take a grain of salt.

But, as we all (should) know by now, everyone on the internet has to be right. Because if someone else was right... we'd be wrong. Impossibru! /sarcasm off now



Together we stand, divided we fall. Focus on our common ground as part of humanity, not the differences.

a reply to: CloudsTasteMetallic

Do you have any specific criticisms of the methodology used by Gallup?

The fact of the matter is that neither of us knows whether the Earth is X, Y or Z number of years old for certain. All we can go by is the information available to us and use intellectual reasoning to estimate how old the planet happens to be. Yes, scientific data is more reliable than scripture/faith, but that does not mean it's 100% irrefutable evidence either.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

There's no such thing as "100% irrefutable evidence" in science. Multiple, independent lines of evidence all point to a very old earth, if there's anything we can rule out it's a 10,000 year old earth or 10,000 year old created mankind.

After having a discussion with LadyGreenEyes on this thread last night, I thought I'd ask my girlfriend the very questions we are talking about. She's pretty much an atheist - not really sure if there's a higher energy than us even - and I was surprised to find out that she thought that the Earth could very well be 10,000 years old or less. I asked the three questions in the survey and she was at a loss. She was also at a loss in knowing if the Earth revolved around the Sun or if it was the Sun who revolved around the Earth.

She isn't dumb, actually far from it. She's an honor student from one of our best Universities here in Montreal, in Finances.

But science isn't her thing. When I pointed out that the lack of information pointed to ignorance, well...that didn't go too well.

Ignorant and ignorance seems to be a very insulting concept even though I said I had no problems admitting that I am totally ignorant when it comes to the Medical field.

I now think that saying someone is ignorant on a certain subject just doesn't cut it. The person being called ignorant on a certain topic takes it as being totally ignorant across the board, which isn't the case but it is perceived that way.

I think this is the first time in four years that I put up a thread that causes so much animosity, from both sides even if some will never admit to it.

Discussion is fun and pleasant. Sour discussion is not. This is my last post on this thread as I think that we will never get any result from it from any point of view. Some things are touchy and this topic surely was. Lesson learned.

~Son.

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

Which makes 66% (TWO THIRD) or 6 in 10 of Americans who more or less think that it happened like that.

But can we trust any polls because most lie and are just a tool used by TPTB to trick people.

I'm with you and I see religion as being a virus of the mind but I can bet you needed to buy the big bang, black hole theory to go against the flow.

You know all them big colourful picures you keep seeing of space and black holes well it all BS and these images are computer enhanced to make them look like that using an advance version of photoshop. Just take a telescope and look at the moon to see what I am saying.

Could you be accused of being as blinded by science as people are blinded by religion ?????

DNA is computer code, our brains work like a computer else we would not have physcological tick in the box forms that are used to put people in boxes and these forms are marked by machines (Like it or not) so lets not argue about computers having the processing power to compete with the human mind.

Big bang = reboot
Physics = CPU instruction set
God = Programmer.

You might not be in the dark ages with these religious folk but why don't you try standing in the light and try debunking what I am saying using science because I am very scientific myself.

I posted this up thread. But I'm still convinced information in this paragraph should have been the headline:

Though the percentage of people who believe in creationism has changed little over the decades, the percentage of people who believe humans evolved without God has more than doubled, and the percentage who believe in God-guided evolution has decreased.

Clearly, the trend isn't more creationists. And had that been the headline we'd be having a very different discussion.

a reply to: SonoftheSun

As a Christian, and an American I am here to say...

BS!!!

I know not one single person that believes the Earth is 10,000 years old.

I have been to many churches throughout the country...

I've heard about it online...

I've heard comedians make fun of it...

But I have never met any believer that believes this...

EVER!

Propaganda.

originally posted by: VirusGuard
a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

>>>
But can we trust any polls because most lie and are just a tool used by TPTB to trick people.
>>>

I do not in particular "trust" polls but what I know that THIS particular one is done repeatedly throughout the years and the numbers, somewhat, reflect always the same thing. Until I have specific reason to doubt the methodology used in this poll..well I have no reason to doubt this result. (Of course, as with any poll there are margins of errors but they should normally not be significant)

>>
You know all them big colourful picures you keep seeing of space and black holes well it all BS and these images are computer enhanced to make them look like that using an advance version of photoshop. Just take a telescope and look at the moon to see what I am saying.

Could you be accused of being as blinded by science as people are blinded by religion ?????
>>

My own understanding of things and "the world" came from curiosity when I was little and then of course from school. In was always interested in all kinds of things, especially astronomy. I read books, read magazines. And yes, I HAD a telescope and this for sure was the happiest Christmas of my life when I got it! We, me and friends also hung out with the nerdier friends in school, one of them had an even better telescope than me...we DID spend nights watching the stars, planets etc. at sleepovers..even set our alarm clocks at 4:00am so we got up to see when certain planets were visible. We also on occasion visited the local observatory, stuff like that.

MIND YOU..when I went to school back at that time...we ALSO had religious classes which were mandatory back at that time. For some reason, however, our religious teacher failed to convince me that their story is the right one. On the other hand I wanted to point out that I was never taught "extreme" fundamental beliefs, such as the earth is 10.000 years old, stuff like that. Seriously, for me this would also be entirely INCONCEIVABLE saying that you have a religious lesson at 9:00am where you're told everything was made during the last 10.000 years...basically directly denying scientific findings, aechaeology, geology etc...and then at 10:00am is the next lesson in Biology where you learn about how organic life forms evolved followed by a chemistry lesson at 11:00am. Obviously this would be absurd.

Could I be "blinded" by science? Yes of course, but I always have/had the option of choice to get my information from many sources in the same way as a I have the choice what TV channel I want to watch. Someone watches the Christian channel the other one watches Nat Geo. I would prefer that channel with that information which seems "plausible" where I somewhat can confirm my "belief" either by common sense or using other sources. (Say, books). Obviously I cannot do that with what a preacher says because there ALL is based on faith only...worse....science/common sense often contradicts it...like the story of the 10.000 year old earth.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: CloudsTasteMetallic

Do you have any specific criticisms of the methodology used by Gallup?

So as to uphold this site's motto and give an informed answer, your question actually challenged me into researching something I most likely wouldn't have otherwise. And for that I thank you.

Gallup.com FAQs - How Does Gallup Polling Work?

The findings from Gallup's U.S. surveys are based on the organization's standard national telephone samples, consisting of directory-assisted random-digit-dial (RDD) telephone samples using a proportionate, stratified sampling design. A computer randomly generates the phone numbers Gallup calls from all working phone exchanges (the first three numbers of your local phone number) and not-listed phone numbers; thus, Gallup is as likely to call unlisted phone numbers as listed phone numbers.

Within each contacted household reached via landline, an interview is sought with an adult 18 years of age or older living in the household who has had the most recent birthday. (This is a method pollsters commonly use to make a random selection within households without having to ask the respondent to provide a complete roster of adults living in the household.) Gallup does not use the same respondent selection procedure when making calls to cell phones because they are typically associated with one individual rather than shared among several members of a household.

When respondents to be interviewed are selected at random, every adult has an equal probability of falling into the sample. The typical sample size for a Gallup poll, either a traditional stand-alone poll or one night's interviewing from Gallup's Daily tracking, is 1,000 national adults with a margin of error of ±4 percentage points. Gallup's Daily tracking process now allows Gallup analysts to aggregate larger groups of interviews for more detailed subgroup analysis. But the accuracy of the estimates derived only marginally improves with larger sample sizes.

Seems solid. The only point I was trying to make is the fact that taking part in one is ultimately a choice. So, there could be an inherent bias of those who agree to take part, and those who simply don't want to be bothered.