That Darwin poll (hat-tip to miss_s_b)...

[djm4_lj]

You know the poll, the poll conducted by Theos which suggested that over half the population of Britain believed that the theory of evolution cannot explain the full complexity of life on Earth, and of which Paul Woolley, director of Theos said: "Darwin is being used by certain atheists today to promote their cause. The result is that, given the false choice of evolution or God, people are rejecting evolution."

Hold that quote by Paul Woolley in your head, and now read what the poll questions, presumably set by Theos, actually were.

I couldn't have said 'yes' to any of those. I don't believe in God, so options 1, 2 & 4 are out, but I also don't think evolution makes belief in God either unnecessary or absurd. Dennett, in Darwin's Dangerous Idea, argues that the theory of evolution, by successfully explaining one of the great mysteries that was previously only explicable by reference to a god/gods (or else left unexplained), knocked away one of the main pillars used to support belief in God. I think Dennett is probably correct when he identifies this as the source of much of the church's hostility to Darwin, but it evolution in-and-of-itself doesn't render God either unnecessary or absurd, and it's something of an abuse of the power of the theory to use it in that way, IMO.

Additionally, if 34% of people believe "Atheistic evolution - the idea that evolution makes belief in God unnecessary and absurd" is definitely or probably true, and 44% of people believe "Theistic evolution - the idea that evolution is the means that God used for the creation of all living things on earth" is definitely or probably true, I make that 78% support for evolution even before you cout the people like me who think: "Evolution is probably true, and there is overwhelming evidence for the theory. This is independent of my belief or otherwise in God."

Theos report here. Theos survey data here.

Comments

[wildeabandon.livejournal.com]

The only real problem I can see with the poll is the third choice - it should be something like "the idea that evolution is the mechanism by which the current diversity of life came about, and that God had nothing to do with it". Other than that it seems reasonable, and the point that the report is trying to make - that theism and belief in natural selection aren't as contradictory as their made out by people on both sides of the debate - is one I wholeheartedly endorse.

[djm4]

Well, yes, aside from the badly-worded question with absolutely no null hypothesis and upon which the whole purpose of the poll hinges, it's an OK poll. With question three worded the way it is, it's totally useless, in other words.

I can see why they worded it the way they did. They wanted to blame the atheists. So they gave believers a nice 'God and evolution are compatible' option (number 2), but didn't give atheists one. Conclusion: it's those obsessive atheists who insist on bringing God into evolution - we Christians are the sane, balanced ones. And if evolution is being rejected, it's because those same atheists insist that it's not compatible with God.

As a weak atheist/strong agnostic who calls Dawkins on this every time the annoying smug git pulls the same stunt, I'm not going to let Theos get away with it just because I agree with their (blatantly rigged) conclusions.

*and breathe...*

[wildeabandon.livejournal.com]

I can see why they worded it the way they did. They wanted to blame the atheists.

Possibly, or possibly they wanted to convince Christians. I'm not much of a fan of "the end justifies the means", but if they get Christians who are uncertain about evolution (and already think they're they sane balanced ones, and are more likely to listen to people who appear to agree with them on that) to be more favourable towards it then that is at least a good end.

[djm4]

If they do that by misrepresenting atheists and presenting us as the 'bad guys' - and their director certainly seems to be doing that - then I don't even accept that as a good end.

[valkyriekaren.livejournal.com]

Absolutely. Atheists get a bad enough press with people parroting received wisdom such as 'if you don't believe in God, you can't have any real morals' and 'there's no atheists in foxholes'. Being called an evil hypocrite gets kinda wearing after a while, without being told that by championing the scientific method I'm putting people off.