Free Science

The poll results, in brief …

71% believe that biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it.

78% agree that, “When Darwin’s theory of evolution is taught in school, students should also be able to learn about scientific evidence that points to an intelligent design of life.”

81% opine, “When Public Broadcasting networks discuss Darwin’s theory of evolution, they should present the scientific evidence that supports it, but also the scientific evidence against it.”

In Zogby Poll, 71% Say Teaching on Darwin’s Theory Should Include Counter Evidence

71% believe: Biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it.

Question 1: Which of the following two statements comes closest to your own opinion?
  • 15% | A: Biology teachers should teach only Darwin’s theory of evolution and the scientific evidence that supports it.
  • 71% | B: Biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it.
  • 14% | Neither/Not sure
More than seven in ten (71%) respondents believe Darwin’s theory of evolution should be taught, but such instruction should include evidence against the theory. Fourteen percent are not sure. Those who feel that the scientific evidence that goes against Darwin’s theory should be taught include 78% each of Republicans, residents of the West, and parents of children under 17. Most 18-29 year-olds (80%) also agree that teachers should include the evidence against the theory of evolution. But as age increases, agreement decreases, to 59% of seniors 65 and older. Despite the overwhelming support in each sub-group for teaching both points of view, some sub-groups are more likely than others to believe that Darwin’s theory and only the scientific evidence supporting it should be taught (Statement A). An average 21% of residents of the East and suburbs think only Darwin’s theory should be taught, and this agreement generally increases with age.

78% agree that: “When Darwin’s theory of evolution is taught in school, students should also be able to learn about scientific evidence that points to an intelligent design of life.”

Question 2: Do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with the following statement: “When Darwin’s theory of evolution is taught in school, students should also be able to learn about scientific evidence that points to an intelligent design of life.”
  • 53% | Strongly agree
  • 25% | Somewhat agree
  • Thus, 78% | Agree
  • Somewhat disagree
  • 8% | Strongly disagree
  • 13% | Disagree
  • 9% | Not sure
Nearly four in five (78%) likely voters agree (including a 53% majority who strongly agrees) that when Darwin’s theory of evolution is taught in school, students should also be able to learn about scientific evidence that points to an intelligent design of life. Approximately one in eight (13%) disagrees, and 9% are not sure. Respondents who agree that students should be able to learn about scientific evidence that points to an intelligent design of life include an average 83% of Republicans, Protestants, parents of children under 17, and people with household incomes of $25,000-$49,999. Adults ages 18-64 (average 79%) are more likely than seniors 65 and older (73%) to agree. Those who are more likely than average to disagree include an average 18% of Independent voters, residents of the East, and people with household incomes of less than $15,000 and $75,000 or more. Among those who are more likely than average to say they are not sure are African Americans (14%) and seniors 65 and older (13%).

81% opine: “When Public Broadcasting networks discuss Darwin’s theory of evolution, they should present the scientific evidence that supports it, but also the scientific evidence against it.”

Question 3: Which of the following two statements comes closest to your own opinion?
  • 10% | When Public Broadcasting networks discuss Darwin’s theory of evolution, they should present only the scientific evidence that supports it.
  • 81% | When Public Broadcasting networks discuss Darwin’s theory of evolution, they should present the scientific evidence that supports it, but also the scientific evidence against it.
  • 10% | Neither/Not sure
Four-fifths of American voters (81%) believe that Public Broadcasting networks should present the scientific evidence against Darwin’s theory of evolution, in addition to the evidence that supports it. One in ten thinks that only the scientific evidence that supports Darwin’s theory should be presented, and another one in ten is not sure. Among voters who are more likely to believe the scientific evidence against Darwin’s theory should be included in Public Broadcasting’s program are most 18-34 year-olds (88%) and those with household incomes of $25,000-$34,999 (89%). Also agreeing are an average 85% of Republicans, Catholics, Protestants, and residents of small cities and rural areas. There is a small number in some sub-groups who are more likely to say that only evidence supporting Darwin’s theory should be presented in the broadcasts. It includes an average 14% of residents of the East and suburbs, Democrats, seniors 70 and older, college graduates, and adults with household incomes of $75,000 or more.

69% disagree that: “The universe and life are the product of purely natural processes that are in no way influenced by God or any intelligent design.”

Question 4: Do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with the following statement: “The universe and life are the product of purely natural processes that are in no way influenced by God or any intelligent design.”
  • Strongly agree | 12%
  • Somewhat agree | 12
  • Agree | 24%
  • Disagree | 69%
  • Somewhat disagree | 13%
  • Strongly disagree | 56%
  • Not sure 7
Seven in ten respondents (69%) disagree with the statement and believe that God or some intelligent design played a role in the creation of life and the universe. Nearly three-fifths of respondents strongly disagree (56%). One-quarter (24%) agrees with the statement and feels that the universe and life are the product of purely natural processes, not influenced by God or any intelligent design. Among the people who are more likely to believe that God or some intelligent design did play a role in the creation of life and the universe are four-fifths or more of born-again Protestants (86%), Republicans (81%), and those with household incomes of $25,000-$34,999 (79%). Also sharing this belief are an average 75% of 30-49 year-olds, residents of small cities and rural areas. More women (74%, including 62% who strongly disagree) than men (63%) agree with the majority. Voters who are more likely to say that the universe and life are the product of purely natural processes, not influenced by God or any intelligent design, include more men (29%) than women (19%), and an average 29% of 18-29 year-olds, Hispanics, African Americans, residents of the East, large cities and suburbs, and people with household incomes of $75,000 or more.
This nationwide poll of 1,202 American adults was conducted by Zogby International from Saturday, August 25 to Wednesday, August 29, 2001. All telephone calls were made from Zogby International headquarters in Utica, N.Y. The margin of error is +/-3.0%. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups. (Note: percentages are rounded off to the nearest number and might not equal 100). Zogby International Polling/Market Research, Public Relations Services, Marketing Strategies 1750 Genesee Street 1600 K Street NW, Suite 600 Utica, New York, 13502 Washington, DC 20006 Phone: (315) 624-0200 Fax: (315) 624-0210 Phone: (202) 429-0022 E-Mail: mail@zogby.com http//www.zogby.com