[jsdalton]

While true, the actual data presents a different picture:

http://i.imgur.com/FXMlOZB.png

[source: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind14/content/chapter-7/c07....]

So actually, the U.S. had the second highest score on that question, behind South Korea. Furthermore, the U.S. consistently performed on par or higher vs. the other countries/regions for the remaining questions.

The real outlier for the U.S. on this survey was the question about evolution -- only 48% of Americans got that right, significantly behind the rest of the pack.

[pyrrhotech]

That's obviously because a lot of people have religious beliefs that make more sense to them than evolution. It's not that they haven't heard of evolution, but that they reject it for the simpler theory found in their 3000 year old book.

[MichaelGG]

IME, that's because most people haven't ever heard any reasonable explanation of evolution. They honestly believe that evolution is just "random things happened and fish decided to walk on land". That "animals wanted to see so they randomly got eyes". Given that explanation of evolution of course they're going to reject it - that explanation is nonsense.

Creation is only simpler if you exclude the axiom of having some omnipotent creator in the first place.

[twiceaday]

It's almost as if this stuff should be taught in school.

[ballard]

Something like 95% of the entire human population believes in something supernatural. And also, what other nonsense do they believe?

[lbrandy]

Another fun fact: Europeans were more likely to answer correctly about evolution than the earth going round the sun.

[ajayjain]

Where the percentage correct is significantly below 50%, it seems like there are very widespread myths being accepted, possibly dangerously. Malaysia scored 8% and Russia scored 18% on the second to last question (Antibiotics kill viruses as well as bacteria) - that's scary to me from a public health standpoint.

[kelseyfrancis]

> The real outlier for the U.S. on this survey was the question about evolution...

Which, the way the question was worded, could reasonably be attributed to people just affirming their belief in creation irrespective of their actual ignorance of the accepted scientific explanation for the origin of humans.

[tzs]

On the question of whether or not the universe began with a huge explosion, they say the correct answer is "true".

Is that actually correct? This was before cosmic inflation, so the whole universe was very small at the instant of the Big Bang, and so wasn't it actually a small explosion?

[lutusp]

Cosmic inflation changed the expansion rate of the "explosion", but this doesn't mean there wasn't an explosion.

Cosmic inflation changed the density ratio between spacetime and mass/energy, but the entirety of the universe's mass/energy came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang. So yes, some explosion that.

Remember about this particular explosion that it wasn't an explosion of mass/energy into the empty space of a pre-existing universe, but an explosion of mass/energy and spacetime into nothing -- the Big Bang was space, time and mass/energy.

In other words, there was no "before" before the Big Bang, and there was no "outside" outside the Big Bang. The Big Bang was everything.

More detail here: http://arachnoid.com/gravity

[piyush_soni]

Does that mean around 1 out of 2 Americans doesn't believe in evolution? That's scary.

[cema]

Why is that scary? If we assume it is indeed a matter of belief the 50/50 chance is not that bad. Now, I suppose both you and me think about it more as a matter of science, but how many people understand what science is (and why), how the scientific method is applied and so on? Well fewer than 50%, I'd guess. US, Europe or Africa, any place.

[ballard]

People that operate outside of coherent, explainable, rational principles tempered by compassion are bigger liabilities. It's common sense.

Departing from this is what allows folks to believe violent terrorism to be a viable strategy to "win."

[carsongross]

Do you have any evidence for this? In my experience people with largely religious principles tempered by compassion are just as reliable as self-identified rationalists.

There has been plenty of atheistic terrorism in the last hundred years...

[lutusp]

> Do you have any evidence for this?

The history of religion? The Inquisition, as just one example among many? Being absolutely sure that God is on your side is a powerful drug.

> There has been plenty of atheistic terrorism in the last hundred years ...

Yes, but it can't compare to the well-established historical connection between religion and war.

One example -- try to imagine recent Indian history without the effect of religion, without Muslims and Hindus killing each other at every opportunity, true to the present day.

Another example -- 9/11 wasn't an attack by have-nots against haves, it was a largely successful effort by religious fanatics to snuff out some infidels.

[carsongross]

Sure, the Inquisition was bad. But so was the gulag. Seems like the 'tempered by compassion' thing is more important than the left hand side, doesn't it?

There is absolutely no historical connection between religion and war. From http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/08/06/god_and_the...

"Moreover, the chief complaint against religion -- that it is history's prime instigator of intergroup conflict -- does not withstand scrutiny. Religious issues motivate only a small minority of recorded wars. The Encyclopedia of Wars surveyed 1,763 violent conflicts across history; only 123 (7 percent) were religious. A BBC-sponsored "God and War" audit, which evaluated major conflicts over 3,500 years and rated them on a 0-to-5 scale for religious motivation (Punic Wars = 0, Crusades = 5), found that more than 60 percent had no religious motivation. Less than 7 percent earned a rating greater than 3. There was little religious motivation for the internecine Russian and Chinese conflicts or the world wars responsible for history's most lethal century of international bloodshed."

[dennisgorelik]

9/11 was an attack mostly fueled by Saudi Arabians pissed off by US involvement in the Middle East in general and in Saudi Arabia in particular.

Blaming it on Islam is missing the point.

[wonderzombie]

What worries me more is people who believe the world is going to end in their lifetimes. How can we plan for the long-term future, as a species, with that kind of worldview?

[carsongross]

Sure, those people worry me too. Even the ones that think a "Singularity" is going to zap them up to techno-heaven.

The people who don't believe in objective right and wrong also worry me.

It's a long list.

[Houshalter]

I think the world will end in our lifetimes. We are only a generation away from strong AI at most.

[piyush_soni]

Well, for that question Europe fared much better. 70% believed in evolution. Only Russia was worse than US.

[Houshalter]

Why? The vast majority are religious as well.

[stefan_kendall]

The form of evolution I was taught in school was strictly wrong. It's not hard to see why anyone would reject the principle outright.

[ballard]

Yes and the guns, mass surveillance and racially unequal incarceration tantamount to genocide.