"RLW" <zzwindol at uqconnect.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.OSF.4.30.0207171219130.13802-100000 at fox.uq.net.au...
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Angilion wrote:
>> > On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 23:00:49 +0000 (UTC), cary at afone.as.arizona.edu(Cary
> > Kittrell) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <3d333c95.21227708 at news.freeserve.net>
angilion at ypical.fsnet.co.uk (Angilion) writes:
> > ><
> > ><On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:18:30 GMT, "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com>
> > ><wrote:
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > ><>only 9% of Americans accept the "theory of evolution" as its been
> > ><>historically defined:
> > ><>http://christianparty.net/gallupcreation.htm> > ><
> > ><Well, the sample size is large enough (1000) *if* it was a random
> > ><selection from across the whole of the USA, and it does show that
> > ><only 9% of the people questioned believe that God had *no part*
> > ><in the development of humanity.
> > ><
> > ><It is evidence that most people in the USA do not believe in the
> > ><theory of evolution.
> > >
> > >Actually, if you read what John himself has put up on his site,
> > >you'll notice that those who believe in YEC are in fact a minority.
> >
> > YEC?
>> Young Earth Creationism. People who believe the Earth was created very
> recently, about 6000 years ago, and base this figure on the bible and
> other carefully selected pieces of 'evidence'.
>> > >Those who answered that evolution took place, with or without
> > >God's tinkering about with it, were forty-nine percent of the
> > >respondents.
> >
> > Yes, I did read that. However, John was correct when he
> > stated that the results of the poll showed that only 9% of
> > the people questioned believed the ToE as historically defined
> > to be true. The ToE as does not include belief in a deity
> > guiding evolution.
>> However, his original statement was:
>> "To feminazis, there's no difference between blue whales and humans,
> because they both "evolved" from the same "common ancestor", so it must
> somehow make sense to them to make such a suggestion. But to the rest of
> the normal people in the country, namely the 91% who reject this "theory"
> of evolution, human beings have a unique role on the planet because they
> are a unique species"
>> If 49% of people believe in 'divinely guided' evolution, then they could
> not be said to reject evolutionary theory outright, so his 91% figure is
> not correct. It's a minor point anyway. Feminazis are not the same as
> evolutionists and I doubt either group think humans and blue whales
> are identical. All it proves is that John Knight likes to mix and
> match his statistics.
>> Rowena.
>>
It's really easy to confuse you with facts, isn't it, Rowena?
You skipped over a key step, which may be why you arrived at the wrong
conclusion.
ONLY 9% of those polled responded that they believe in the "theory" of
evolution, as defined by the "evolutionists" themselves, and by nobody else.
ONLY 4% said that they had "no opinion", and you cannot include them as
"evolutionists", can you?
And the 40% who you conveniently ignored believe "God guided this process",
which is exactly the opposite of what "evolutionists" themselves preach from
the rafters. The simple fact that the words "developed over millions of
years" were thrown in was enough to throw you off, wasn't it?
Isn't the original statement correct, as is?: "91% [] reject this 'theory'
of evolution".
John Knight
