A Texas Evolution-Education Poll

This is something we’ve never done before, but it’s a popular feature at other blogs — calling your attention to an on-line poll.

You can find this one at the website of KIII-TV, “The South Texas News Leader.” We think they’re located in Corpus Christi, Texas. The poll is titled What’s your opinion about teaching the theory of evolution in public schools?

Their options — this will be sooooo difficult for you — are as follows:

• Evolution should be taught in public schools.
• Evolution should be taught along with creationism.
• Creationism should be taught, not evolution.
• I don’t know.

The first and third options aren’t mirror-images of each other. We don’t know if the designer of the poll was being crafty or if his attention span drifted in the time it took him to complete his work. Anyway, give the matter some careful thought, and then let your opinion be known.

Our humble blog doesn’t have the cyber-muscle to change the results in any noticeable way, but don’t let that stop you. We vote in Presidential elections, knowing that our individual choice is all but meaningless. So go ahead and vote in the Corpus Christi Creationism poll.

Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

18 responses to “A Texas Evolution-Education Poll

  1. Done

  2. The evolution-only option is slightly ahead among the four choices, but the combination of evolution+creation and creation-only is about 60%. That’s painful.

  3. I voted, and also found it curious that option 1 did not mirror option 3 by stating “and not creationism.” One thing I keep reminding everyone is that most people define “creationism” very differently than we critics do. Specifically, we use the word “creationism” to denote the DI’s phony “critical analysis of evolution” and related scams like “academic ‘freedom’,” even though they make no mention of any alternate “theory,” let alone any of the mutually contradictory literal interpretations of Genesis. But it is the latter that the most of the ~60% that Ed referred to want taught. Many of them would be disappointed if the scam artists got their way. And many would wonder “Why is only evolution ‘critically analyzed’ and not creationism too?”

  4. Just voted, SC. Its now at 1) 40% 2) 35% 3) 23% 4) 2%.

  5. The first option, “teach evolution,” is leading with 41%. The next option, “teach both,” is close behind with 35%. The “creationism only” option has 22%, which is way too high but that’s how things are out there. Interestingly, the “don’t know” option is only 2%. Virtually everyone has an opinion. Hey — all the numbers add up to 100%. What are the odds of that happening? I see the hand of the celestial Designer in all this.

  6. Done and done. 44% for option one.
    Has anyone sent this to PZ? That’ll break their little poll.

  7. Numbers are now 1) 44, 2) 33, 3) 21 and 4) 2.

  8. We think they’re located in Corpus Christi, Texas.

    Yup, according to their FCC filing, that’s where they are located.

  9. Option #1 seems to be receiving twice the votes as option #3 – which is reason to be cautiously optimistic. But Texas may not be the most representative state to gauge the direction of the “controversy.”

    Although it’s technically part of the Bible Belt, and considered a “battleground” state, Texas is not a stronghold of traditional Baptists – or even of Protestantism in general. Catholicism appears to be prevalent in most of Texas, and Catholics don’t seem to have as big an issue with Darwin. At least that’s what I remember. (I went to a private Catholic high school myself, and was properly brainwashed in religion. But I remember evolution being taught with nary a hitch or complaint. That was back in the seventies.)

  10. magpie61 says:

    Option #1 seems to be receiving twice the votes as option #3 – which is reason to be cautiously optimistic.

    Yes, but option 2 (“teach both”) and option 3 (“creationism only”) together have more votes than option 1 (“only evolution”). Not good enough!

  11. Curmudgeon: “Not good enough!”
    And might be even worse if option 1 specifically stated “not creationism.” Note that even a Discoveroid would choose option 1, with or without the “not creationism” part, though their method of “teaching” evolution would be to misreprepresent it specifically to promote unreasonable doubt.

  12. aturingtest

    At 3:15pm CST, option 1 had 46%, while option 2 had 32% and option 3 was at 20%. So the numbers and their relative positions seem to be staying about the same (which I guess could mean that PZ and his crew haven’t weighed in yet).
    And I don’t know how this poll could really be read as representative of Texas when there’s no way to know how many folks voting are actually in Texas. I put my oar in from Mississippi.
    And, while I agree that options 1 and 3 aren’t mutually exclusive, I think most people will read option 1 as excluding creationism and vote on that understanding. That might be reason for hope.

  13. aturingtest

    Another point that occurs to me is that the question as asked is misleading in that it doesn’t specify that we’re talking about science classes in public schools. Most folks would probably assume that’s what they mean, but by not specifying “science” in the question, they make it difficult to point out that ID/creationism isn’t science, and THAT’S why it doesn’t belong, and make it easier to just shrug and say ” why not both sides?”. My wife (who identifies herself as a saved Christian) said exactly that to me not long ago, but immediately understood the distinction when I pointed it out to her. A tighter-phrased question might have gotten better responses.

  14. Option one is still only 46%. I don’t think we’ve sent a hundred people over there, but it’s had an effect because the poll seems to have a small number of voters. It shouldn’t be difficult to get option one up over 50%.

  15. Not sure what good gaming meaningless internet polls are. No one who expects to be taken seriously puts any confidence in them. And anyone unscrupulous enough to try to get people to take them seriously is just going to be dishonest in some other way.

    Notice how Ron Paul always wins online polls? Why has he not been President like three times already?

  16. Meaningless or not, option one is creeping up there. 47% at 12:52 AM EDT Monday, Aug. 1.

    I dont agree that it’s meaningless. If some politicians pay attention to it, it isn’t meaningless. It could help shape public policy.

  17. I agree with retiredsciguy. Politicians do pay attention to polls. My Congresscritter’s website, for example, has no information about his views on the debt limit debacle, but it does have an online poll where his constituents can leave their views for him. Sadly, I’m not sure that’s at all unusual.

  18. The poll is no longer on their website, it’s been replaced with another. Last time I checked, option one was at 49%, which ain’t bad. The “I don’t know” option was still at 2%, so that’s 51%, which means that option one — alone — scored better than the total of “teach both” and “teach only creationism.” Your Curmudgeon is satisfied.