We didn’t find much that was interesting or surprising about this Gallup survey showing that many Americans reject the theory that humans evolved from other life forms over millions of years.
First, there seem to be some rather glaring contradictions in the results:
One such question was included in a May Gallup Panel survey:
Now thinking about how human beings came to exist on Earth, do you, personally, believe in evolution, or not?
Yes, believe
in
evolutionNo, do
notNo
opinion2007 May 21-24
49
48
2
It is important to note that this question included a specific reference to “thinking about how human beings came to exist on Earth . . .” that oriented the respondents toward an explicit consideration of the implication of evolution for man’s origin. Results may have been different without this introductory phrase.
With that said, Americans’ responses to this question are essentially split down the middle. About half say they do believe in evolution and about half say they do not.
A second question included in a June 1-3 USA Today/Gallup poll asked about evolution side by side with a similar question about creationism:
Next, we’d like to ask about your views on two different explanations for the origin and development of life on earth. Do you think — [ITEMS ROTATED] — is — [ROTATED: definitely true, probably true, probably false, (or) definitely false]?
A. Evolution, that is, the idea that human beings developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life
Definite-
ly trueProbably
trueProbably
falseDefinite-
ly falseNo
opinionTotal
trueTotal
false
2007 Jun 1-3
18%
35
16
28
3
53
44
B. Creationism, that is, the idea that God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years
Definite-
ly trueProbably
trueProbably
falseDefinite-
ly falseNo
opinionTotal
trueTotal
false2007 Jun 1-3
39%
27
16
15
3
66
31
So a majority believes in young-Earth creationism, and a majority believes humans developed from less advanced lifeforms over millions of years. Obviously both cannot be true. The disparity can be explained by “probably” vs. “definitely”.
But what really caught our eye was this bit of editorial comment from pollster Frank Newport:
Although many scientists accept evolution as the best theoretical explanation for diversity in forms of life on Earth, the issue of its validity has risen again as an important issue in the current 2008 presidential campaign. Two recent Republican debates have included questions to the candidates about evolution.
Evolution is an important question in the in the 2008 presidential campaign? We don’t think it’s a question at all, let alone an important one. And the view that it’s important is based on what? The fact some journalist asked a question about it in a debate makes it an important question? Is that how it works? Seems a bit circular – Why was the question asked? Because it’s important. Why is it important? Because a question was asked.
We’ll be on the edge of our seats for the next debate, awaiting Senator McCain’s views on quantum mechanics, or Senator Obama’s take on the theory of relativity. “E=mc2? We need to get away from the divisive questions that divide America. I stand for a new kind of politics, a politics for the 21st century….”
The Unalienable Right 
Unless God intervenes, more and more people will believe in evolution. The indoctrination process has been ramped up at the request of people that sit in the highest seats of the educational process.
Evolution vs. Creationism is a big argument and many are watching the results of the controversy. But there need not be any argument at all. All the Evolutionist need to do is provide some proof for their theory. Here is how we can stop the arguing…
If evolutionists really want to end the arguments all they have to do is, get their brilliant heads together and assemble a ‘simple’ living cell. This should be possible, since they certainly have a very great amount of knowledge about what is inside the ‘simple’ cell.
After all, shouldn’t all the combined Intelligence of all the worlds scientist be able the do what chance encounters with random chemicals, without a set of instructions, accomplished about 4 billion years ago,according to the evolutionists, having no intelligence at all available to help them along in their quest to become a living entity. Surely then the evolutionists scientists today should be able to make us a ‘simple’ cell.
If it weren’t so pitiful it would be humorous, that intelligent people have swallowed the evolution mythology.
Beyond doubt, the main reason people believe in evolution is that sources they admire, say it is so. It would pay for these people to do a thorough examination of all the evidence CONTRARY to evolution that is readily available: Try answersingenesis.org. The evolutionists should honestly examine the SUPPOSED evidence ‘FOR’ evolution for THEMSELVES.
Build us a cell, from scratch, with the required raw material, that is with NO cell material, just the ‘raw’ stuff, and the argument is over. But if the scientists are unsuccessful, perhaps they should try Mother Earth’s recipe, you know, the one they claim worked the first time about 4 billion years ago, so they say. All they need to do is to gather all the chemicals that we know are essential for life, pour them into a large clay pot and stir vigorously for a few billion years, and Walla, LIFE!
Oh, you don’t believe the ‘original’ Mother Earth recipe will work? You are NOT alone, Neither do I, and MILLIONS of others!