[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Rufusboi

You're right. Dreadgeek did not say most. Dreadgeek asked how many people do we know who would check Google Earth and the CIA factbook and how many would look down their noses at those that did? These were rhetorical questions. The unstated response/belief behind that rhetorical question is....not many. The rhetorical question itself assumed that readers would agree. I just chose to point out that I didn't.

Yes, it was a rhetorical question but I didn't have a number in mind. If I HAD to put a number I would say that as much as 40% of the American population either would either not bother looking going to a map and/or taking other actions based upon the following:

A Roper ASW poll found that 87% of Americans 18 - 24 couldn't find Iraq on a map, 83% couldn't find Afghanistan on a map and 11% couldn't find the United States on a map. Let that sink in for a moment...slightly more than 10% couldn't find their OWN country on a map!

Only half of the population will buy a book of ANY sort this year.

According to another study, only 53% of the American population know that a year is the time it takes the Earth to revolve around the Sun. Only 59% know that humans and dinosaurs didn't live at the same time. Only 47% can correctly estimate the amount of the Earth that is covered in water.

Again, let that sink in. Fully 47% of the population doesn't know something as basic as what a year *actually* is. 41% believe, against all available evidence, that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time. These aren't kids, these are adults. And yet we are supposed to be sanguine that large numbers of people would go out and take the time to educate themselves on some matter when they could just as easily watch American Idol? I see nothing to be sanguine about. If 10% of adults thought humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time--again there is no evidence in support of the idea that they did and every piece of available evidence says they didn't--that would be disturbing in itself. The idea that four times that percentage don't is deeply troubling.

Unless Dreadgeek wants to correct my assumption and let me know that the question was literal and she wanted an actual number for how many people I personally know who would or would not scoff or who would or would not go to Google Earth and the CIA factbook. I can get those numbers but it might take a while. So I jumped in and answered the unstated assumption behind the rhetorical question and said Many. More than you give Americans credit for.

If that is the case then how would YOU go about explaining the kinds of numbers above? Look around the Internet all you wish, every study or poll you find will have numbers in and around the same orbits. I wasn't saying nor did I mean to imply that a majority wouldn't bother or would scoff, I probably should have said a disturbingly large minority to have avoided this. But if the American people, overall, are so well informed can you explain why large numbers (40% of the American people is a significant number of adults) don't know basic things like why we have seasons, what a year is, what a day is.

I happen to think more people would than would not. I mean, really, this is all we are arguing about.

Based upon what?

Opinions. Dreadgeek's opinion not so many, my opinion, more that you are willing to give credit for. Other than that I'm not disagreeing with anything you say. I'm debating a few points you make, that's all.

Okay then I mistook what you were saying. Because when you stated that if someone disagrees about evolution it doesn't make them ignorant it read, to me, like you were saying that it was possible for someone to be well versed in biology, know evolutionary biology at a level one could call a reasonably informed layperson, and still disagree with the theory. I would strenuously disagree. The only people I know who disagree with evolutionary theory are either inveterate liars (Michael Behe) or cranks (Fred Hoyle) or have no idea what the theory actually states (everyone else who argues against evolution using arguments of the form "well, if evolution happened where is the half-crocodile, half-man" or "if evolution happened and we came from monkeys why are there still monkeys" or "evolution is only a theory").

And maybe stats don't tell us much after all.

Or maybe it depends upon where the stats come from, how they were gathered, and how methodologically sound the survey, study or poll was in its execution. There are stats that come from, say, NARTH that I don't buy because NARTH has no interest whatsoever in empiricism--they just like using the language of empiricism to bolster their manifestly unscientific positions vis a vis homosexuality. If, on the other hand, the AAS (American Academy of Science) or the NSF (National Science Foundation) conducts a study or sponsors one, I'm going to give it some credence because both of those organizations *do* care very much about empirical data and well-designed survey tools.

I get it that you disagree that large numbers--again not a majority but one-third of a population is NOT a trivial number--of the American people are not profoundly and willfully ignorant on a number of subjects. I have no idea why you believe that or upon what a reasonable person (which I like to think I am) might base such a belief other than sheer, willful, wishful thinking. However, I would love for you to explain to me why I am wrong because here is an instance where I would be overjoyed--turning cartwheels and shouting hallelujahs from every rooftop in a 5 mile radius overjoyed--if I were. Hell, if I were wrong I would weep in joy and probably die of relieved ecstasy.

So, lay it on me. Why am I wrong? Wishful thinking notwithstanding. Really, I want to be wrong about this.

Cheers
Aj