Decima Poll: Most Cdns see God in creation process

[bush_cheney2004]

Looks like Canadians want to hedge their "bet":

The Canadian Press-Decima Research survey suggests that 60 per cent of Canadians believe God had either a direct or indirect role in creating mankind, shattering the myth that Canadians had long ago put their faith strictly behind the scientific explanation for creation.

And there were a few surprises: Conservatives were more likely than Liberals to say that God had no part in the process, and Alberta, regarded as the birthplace of social conservatism, had one of the lowest levels of beliefs for strict creationism at 22 per cent.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2007/07...4309557-cp.html

[Riverwind]

The Canadian Press-Decima Research survey suggests that 60 per cent of Canadians believe God had either a direct or indirect role in creating mankind, shattering the myth that Canadians had long ago put their faith strictly behind the scientific explanation for creation.

It makes no sense to lump people who accept evolution science with a god caveat with people that completely deny the evidence for evolution. The 'Bubbas' you speak of are the latter group - only 26% of Canadians fell into that category. OTOH - 47% of Americans fall into the 'Bubba' category.

[bush_cheney2004]

It makes plenty of sense....parsing the poll findings for Bubba factor only ignores the obvious underlying point...creationism is alive and well in Canada. Looking down one's scientific nose at Bubbas north or south just got a little more problematic.

[Riverwind]

It makes plenty of sense....parsing the poll findings for Bubba factor only ignores the obvious underlying point...creationism is alive and well in Canada. Looking down one's scientific nose at Bubbas north or south just got a little lonlier.

You don't seem to get it. The creationists that are the target of so much distain in the media are the people that insist on a literal interpretation of the Christian Bible and ignore scientific evidence to the contrary. These people have nothing in common with people that accept the science of evolution but beleive that a deity was involved in the process some how.

In fact, I suspect most people who think that a deity influenced the process would not call themselves creationists - that is a moniker reserved for the evolution science deniers that make up 47% of the US population (and 26% of the Canadian population).

[bush_cheney2004]

In fact, I suspect most people who think that a deity influenced the process would not call themselves creationists - that is a moniker reserved for the evolution science deniers that make up 47% of the US population (and 26% of the Canadian population).

I don't care what they call themselves, nor does it matter how the media characterizes any of the believers....the point is that a majority of Canadians polled for a "God" in the "creation" process.

American "Bubbas" just got a lot more company.

[Riverwind]

American "Bubbas" just got a lot more company.

American "Bubbas" are the people who believe that God created the earth 10000 years ago. Your poll simply re-enforces the point that a majority of Canadians reject that view.

[bush_cheney2004]

American "Bubbas" are the people who believe that God created the earth 10000 years ago. Your poll simply re-enforces the point that a majority of Canadians reject that view.

It wasn't "my poll"....sorry, but Canada has "Bubbas"...plenty of them. If it ruins some preconceived notion of "poll superiority" with respect to Creationism, I would only point out that the same methods were used to canvas American opinions.

The poll (for what it's worth) suggests that only about one-third of Canadians are strict "Evolutionists".

We got Bubbas,

Yeah we do,

We got Bubbas,

How 'bout YOU!!!!

[Riverwind]

If it ruins some preconceived notion of "poll superiority" with respect to Creationism, I would only point out that the same methods were used to canvas American opinions.

Here is the poll results for Americans:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

47% of Americans reject Evolution Science. Only 26% of Canadians do. The poll re-enforces the stereotype that creationism is largely an American problem. I find it bizarre that you seem to think that it indicates the reverse.

The poll (for what it's worth) suggests that only about one-third of Canadians are strict "Evolutionists".

No it indicates that 74% of Canadians accept the science of evolution. Only 53% of Americans do.

[bush_cheney2004]

47% of Americans reject Evolution Science. Only 26% of Canadians do. The poll re-enforces the stereotype that creationism is largely an American problem. I find it bizarre that you seem to think that it indicates the reverse.

It doesn't matter either way to me, save for pointing out that Creationism is very much alive in Canada and is not only an "American problem" (it's not a problem at all...it is a belief system, like any other).

I am amazed at the statistical squirming displayed in light of the obvious support that Creationism has in Canada. That Americans poll higher does not diminish this finding.

Christ...there is a Creation Science museum in Alberta, which polled lower than average.

[Riverwind]

I am amazed at the statistical squirming displayed in light of the obvious support that Creationism has in Canada.

Creationism refers to the people that believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible. It does _not_ describe people who accept evolution science. Such people have no interest in things like the 'creation museum'.

Let put it another way. You are talking a poll where 75% of said they won't vote republican and claiming it shows a majority support the Rupublicans because 60% of people said they won't vote for Democrats.

You are trying to draw a conclusion that is not supported by the data - it is simply absurd.

[bush_cheney2004]

You are trying to draw a conclusion that is not supported by the data - it is simply absurd.

And you are displaying an unusual reaction to a single word, and even in this point you are mistaken. The term "Strict Creationism" is used to make such a distinction. There are many shades of Creationism, and that includes the Canadian "Bubbas".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism

[Riverwind]

The term "Strict Creationism" is used to make such a distinction. There are many shades of Creationism, and that includes the Canadian "Bubbas".

You are the one who used the term "Bubbas" to describe anyone who is not an absolute atheist. I assume that is not a term that you would use yourself and that you are implying that others would decribe all non-atheists as uneducated hicks (i.e. Bubbas). This is not the case, the derision that you hear in the media is directed only at the evolution deniers.

It is rediculous to manufacture a definition of a word that you claim others use and then use your definition to make a point. If you want to make a point by using the word "Bubbas" then you must use it in the way that the people you wish to criticize would actually use the word. The people that you wish to criticize would never you the word "Bubbas" to describe people who accept evolution science.

[bush_cheney2004]

You are the one who used the term "Bubbas" to describe anyone who is not an absolute atheist. I assume that is not a term that you would use yourself and that you are implying that others would decribe all non-atheists as uneducated hicks (i.e. Bubbas). This is not the case, the derision that you hear in the media is directed only at the evolution deniers.

It is rediculous to manufacture a definition of a word that you claim others use and then use your definition to make a point. If you want to make a point by using the word "Bubbas" then you must use it in the way that the people you wish to criticize would actually use the word.

You know what happens when one assumes....I purposely used the reference to "Bubbas" in the same sloppy manner that others on this forum have used the term to stereotype Americans. It is very amusing to find such careful machinations to avoid that label at all cost in order to maintain some kind of "creationism poll" superiority, as if it mattered at all.

I did not manufacture the definition and usage of "Creationism" and its many forms. Your protests cannot change popular usage and meaning.

I'm sorry sir, but Canada does indeed have Bubbas to a greater degree than many would have "assumed".

And that's OK.

[Riverwind]

You know what happens when one assumes....I purposely used the reference to "Bubbas" in the same sloppy manner that others on this forum have used the term to stereotype Americans.

Then don't be surprised to get responses that point out your sloppiness.

If you wish to debunk a stereotype then you actually need to learn why the stereotype exists. In this case, the "Bubbas" stereotype would not exist if only 26% of Americans denied evolution and the rest subscribed to some other form of creationism. The stereotype exists because nearly 50% of Americans deny evolution.

IOW - you are missing the point by focusing on the 'creationism' part when you should be focusing on the 'deny evolution' part. If you want to show Canada just as many "Bubbas" as the US then you need to show some data regarding the number of evolution deniers. The poll you posted does not provide that data.

[bush_cheney2004]

If you wish to debunk a stereotype then you actually need to learn why the stereotype exists. In this case, the "Bubbas" stereotype would not exist if only 26% of Americans denied evolution and the rest subscribed to some other form of creationism. The stereotype exists because nearly 50% of Americans deny evolution.

What is magic about 26%? That's almost enough for minority rule in Parliament.

Canada's got Bubbas....plenty of 'em too. More than enough to spawn equally false stateside stereotypes (if Americans gave a damn about Canadian polls.....mostly they don't). I'm not sure why Canadians care what Americans believe wrt "Creationism".

Strident attempts to deflect the underlying message of a Canadian majority belief in a deity and "creation" will not be successful by pointing at Americans for comparison.

[Riverwind]

What is magic about 26%? That's almost enough for minority rule in Parliament.

Nothing magic about it. Stereotypes exist because of differences between groups of people. In some cases the differences are fictional. In this case there is significant statistical difference between Canadians and Americans. Your claims that there is no difference between Canadians and Americans on this point are not supported by the data you provided.

Canada's got Bubbas....plenty of 'em too.

As I said before - you can't debunk a stereo type by redefining what that stereotype means to the people that hold that stereotype. People that believe in the Bubba stereotype only include evolution deniers in that definition. You can go on as much as you like about what the precise definition of creationism is but that won't address your flawed definition of the stereotype.

[bush_cheney2004]

Nothing magic about it. Stereotypes exist because of differences between groups of people. In some cases the differences are fictional. In this case there is significant statistical difference between Canadians and Americans. Your claims that there is no difference between Canadians and Americans on this point are not supported by the data you provided.

I wrote no such thing...you have been making a Herculean effort to disassociate the majority of Canadians polled from the underlying question of Creationism. You cannot parse this finding away.

Sorry, but you have neighbors who believe in a God and various grades of Creationism. You got Bubbas, but don't worry, it's not like you got roaches!

FYI..."Bubba" means a lot of different things to different people.

[Mad_Michael]

What is magic about 26%? That's almost enough for minority rule in Parliament.

Nothing.

It is a lot less than the 40% (according to the same poll) who reject any role of any God in the process.

[ScottSA]

It makes plenty of sense....parsing the poll findings for Bubba factor only ignores the obvious underlying point...creationism is alive and well in Canada. Looking down one's scientific nose at Bubbas north or south just got a little lonlier.

You don't seem to get it. The creationists that are the target of so much distain in the media are the people that insist on a literal interpretation of the Christian Bible and ignore scientific evidence to the contrary. These people have nothing in common with people that accept the science of evolution but beleive that a deity was involved in the process some how.

In fact, I suspect most people who think that a deity influenced the process would not call themselves creationists - that is a moniker reserved for the evolution science deniers that make up 47% of the US population (and 26% of the Canadian population).

Nonsense. The creationists who are the target of so much distain in the media is anyone who doesn't reject the role of God, and "creationism" by no means refers to only those who reject evolution. There are creationists who think God Created the universe and then went for a walk. There are those who think God created man, have him free will and then went for a walk. There are those who think Life is a creation of God, and that's the totality of his role. A creationist is anyone who believes some element of our existence was created.

I would guess that very very few people reject evolution in its entirety. Probably about the same number of people as play with rattlesnakes at church.

[M.Dancer]

creationists who are the target of so much distain in the media is anyone who doesn't reject the role of God, and "creationism" by no means refers to only those who reject evolution.

I doubt that. Citation please.

[Mad_Michael]

I would guess that very very few people reject evolution in its entirety. Probably about the same number of people as play with rattlesnakes at church.

Numbers on this are posted in this thread.

Roughly 46% of Americans, 26% of Canadians completely reject evolutionary theory.

That's a lotta rattlesnakes in Churches!

[ScottSA]

creationists who are the target of so much distain in the media is anyone who doesn't reject the role of God, and "creationism" by no means refers to only those who reject evolution.

I doubt that. Citation please.

I don't need a citation. I'm a creationist and I don't reject evolution.

[M.Dancer]

creationists who are the target of so much distain in the media is anyone who doesn't reject the role of God, and "creationism" by no means refers to only those who reject evolution.

I doubt that. Citation please.

I don't need a citation. I'm a creationist and I don't reject evolution.

You are not a creationist. You may be a believer in the great architect, or someone who hold that the Prime Mover started it all, but you are not a creationist.

A creationist is someone who believes in the literal biblical account of creation. While you may say that your definition suits you, it is only your definition and it isn't shared by anyone else.

[ScottSA]

creationists who are the target of so much distain in the media is anyone who doesn't reject the role of God, and "creationism" by no means refers to only those who reject evolution.

I doubt that. Citation please.

I don't need a citation. I'm a creationist and I don't reject evolution.

You are not a creationist. You may be a believer in the great architect, or someone who hold that the Prime Mover started it all, but you are not a creationist.

A creationist is someone who believes in the literal biblical account of creation. While you may say that your definition suits you, it is only your definition and it isn't shared by anyone else.

Allow me to educate you:

The term can be used to refer to specific doctrines within this broad range of beliefs, for example in theology Creationism refers to the doctrine that God directly creates a soul for each body, as against traducianism or pre-existence of the soul. In relation to the creation-evolution controversy the term creationism (or strict creationism) is commonly used to refer to rejection of evolution. The wide spectrum of such beliefs includes young Earth creationism holding a very literal interpretation of Genesis, while old Earth creationism accepts geological findings but rejects evolution. The term theistic evolution has been coined to refer to beliefs in creation which are compatible with scientific findings on evolution and the age of the Earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism

Despite many people's tendency to think of all creationists in one group and all evolutionists in another, "creationism" refers to a wide range of beliefs. This article gives a brief introduction to creationist positions. It tries to cover the breadth of creationist beliefs (and a little of the variety of evolutionist belief), but it gives little depth. In addition to the positions, it lists some influential people, organizations, books, and periodicals which espouse the positions. Interested readers may look up these references. Also, a section near the end gives suggestions for further reading.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wic.html

[M.Dancer]

Allow me to educate you:

Har...allow me to show you what you calim to be.....

The term theistic evolution has been coined to refer to beliefs in creation which are compatible with scientific findings on evolution and the age of the Earth.

You are a theistic evolutionist.....hated by the creationists

Trust me.......

Morris, for example, devotes the last 20% of his book Scientific Creationism to attacks on other forms of creationism (Morris 1985).

CREATION

Flat Earthers

Geocentrists

Young Earth Creationists

(Omphalos)

Old Earth Creationists

(Gap Creationism)

(Day-Age Creationism)

(Progressive Creationism)

(Intelligent Design Creationism)

Evolutionary Creationists

Theistic Evolutionists

Methodological Materialistic Evolutionists

Philosophical Materialistic Evolutionists

EVOLUTION

Say Thank you Master Dancer for improving my slack and idle brain and then give me 20