International Poll on Evolution Confuses British Darwinists

Anika Smith

This just gets better. Remember the International poll we highlighted earlier this week? British Darwinists, confused by the results (You mean our constant barrage of DARWIN RULZ msgs aren’t convincing anyone?), has taken to that old defense mechanism every psychologist knows too well: projection.
That’s it! They must be confused about Darwin’s theory. After all, “scientific wording” like “intelligent design” tricks people into thinking what they couldn’t possibly think after all the money we’ve spent on advertising Darwin’s awesomeness.
I almost wish they didn’t make it this easy:

Surprisingly, this percentage [of support for teaching alternative theories] was higher than in the US — a comparative bastion of religious fundamentalism — and Egypt, where only a third as many people dissented from the scientific consensus.

Actually, the percentage was the same in the US, if we’re going by total respondents (60% in the UK and the US want other perspectives taught). For those who have heard of Darwin, they’re right, Britain has more support for alternative theories (66% to the US’s 64%), but who can blame them? They have to put up with Richard Dawkins year-round. We only have to suffer through his stodgy book tour every three years or so.
As for Egypt’s lack of “dissent from the scientific consensus” (what a lovely phrase!), maybe that’s because 62% of respondents had never heard of Darwin and had no idea what they were being asked. Most people in Egypt didn’t know what to say in response to the question, “How should evolutionary theory be taught in science lessons at schools?” though the few who had heard of Darwin preferred alternatives there, too, 45% to 22%.
Perhaps if certain British Darwinists (we’re looking at you, Ekklesia) channeled the time and energy they spend on condescending to America, religion, dissent from Darwin, and oh yes, their own audience, into something more productive, like reading poll numbers accurately, they might be more effective.

Anika Smith