New Poll Reveals Widespread Skepticism in U.S. Toward Evolution, Big Bang

ape pdWASHINGTON – According to a new Associated Press poll, over 50% of Americans believe the origin of the universe was guided by a supreme being, while a similarly high number question the reliability of evolution and the big bang theory.

In a nationwide poll conducted by the Associated Press and research group GfK, over 1,000 American adults were asked about their beliefs on various scientific and political issues. According to the recently-released poll results, a majority of Americans are skeptical about evolution and the big bang theory.

The poll found that only 14% of Americans are “extremely confident” that life on Earth can be attributed to evolution and natural selection. In contrast, over 40% of the poll’s participants said they were either “not too confident” or “not at all confident” that life evolved through natural selection.

Much like evolution, the big bang theory is largely questioned by the American public as 51% of those polled said that they were not confident the universe began with a big bang.

Views on the age of the Earth are also sharply divided. The poll shows that approximately one-fourth of Americans believe the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, but 36% doubt the Earth is this old.

Overall, 54% of participants agreed with the following statement: “The universe is so complex, there must be a supreme being guiding its creation.” A much smaller percentage of people—25%–disagreed with this statement.

Pollsters say these survey results show that Americans have “more skepticism than confidence” when it comes to evolution, the big bang, and other naturalistic theories. According to a statement released by the AP and GfK, these findings “depress and upset” evolutionary scientists.

  • Connect with Christian News

“Confidence in evolution, the Big Bang, the age of the Earth and climate change decline sharply as faith in a supreme being rises, according to the poll,” the statement says. “Likewise, those who regularly attend religious services or are evangelical Christians express much greater doubts about scientific concepts they may see as contradictory to their faith.”

One physicist interviewed by CBS News said the poll results are “enormously distressing.”

Another evolutionist opined that the poll results illustrate the battle between “faith” and “facts.”

Despite evolutionists’ assertions that naturalistic scientific models are substantiated facts, many scientists strongly disagree. Dr. A.J. Monty White is a Ph.D. scientist with experience in geology, chemistry, and other scientific fields.

“It cannot be overemphasized that there are many places in the fossil record where it is expected that plenty of intermediate forms should be found—yet they are not there,” Dr. White wrote in an article entitled, “Hasn’t Evolution Been Proven True?” “All the evolutionists ever point to is a handful of highly debatable transitional forms, whereas they should be able to show us thousands of incontestable examples.”

“Natural selection (done in the wild) and artificial selection (as done by breeders) produce enormous varieties within the different kinds of plants and animals,” Dr. White added. “It has proved an impossible feat, however, to change one kind of creature into a different kind of plant or animal.”

“The so-called ‘kind barrier’ has never been crossed,” he concluded. “Such evolution has never been observed. This has been pointed out by none other than evolutionary Professor Richard Dawkins, who confidently asserted in an interview that evolution has been observed but then added, ‘It’s just that it hasn’t been observed while it’s happening.’”

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Striving to bring you the news without compromise and with Christ in focus, we press on despite recent changes in Facebook and Google's algorithms, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational site revenue. If you have benefited from our news coverage, please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News Network supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed. May Christ continue to be exalted through this work! Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? >>

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Dan Cameron

    Is that a picture of Australopithecus afarensis?

  • Dan Cameron

    Re: ‘It’s just that it hasn’t been observed while it’s happening.’”

    Meanwhile, living fossils demonstrate human evolution didn’t happen. The belief it hasn’t been observed while happening seems to fit right in with the “rescue hypothesis”. .. “This added hypothesis says that some animals did not evolve.” – creation website

    Enough of the goalpost moving, human evolution has been refuted and it’s done like dinner, it needs to be taken out of schools.

  • WorldGoneCrazy

    Oh my goodness – the “universe created itself” crowd is running for their Xanax right now! It just goes to show that it takes a LOT of faith to believe that the universe came into existence uncaused, that life came from non-life, that minds evolved from molecules, and that personal beings came into existence from impersonal causes. This is a great day for the Kalam Cosmological Argument and the Intelligent Design movement! (Not to mention for Biblical Christianity.)

  • samuel cagumbay

    Let a little child decide whether the world came by itself or somebody out there made it. A little child is more rational than an adult and he never lies and is not influenced by scientific knowledge or by religious theology.

  • C.P. Steinmetz

    This article is very scary. Unfortunately, it shows the success of anti-science religionist organizations like the Discovery Institute (which wants to replace science with religion, and “teach the [non-existent] controversy”), ICR (which only looks for things that can be twisted to support their religious view – while ignoring everything else) and Answers in Genesis (The Fred and Wilma Flintstone Museum).

    Just as an exercise, take your favorite argument against evolution to the Talk Origins Archive ( and see it soundly debunked by mainstream science. Or, do as this article does, and totally ignore mainstream science and quote one of the extremely few ‘science’ people who disagree with the totality of science.

    The comments are almost worse, as they demonstrate a frighteningly low grasp of evolution and science in general.

    “Meanwhile, living fossils demonstrate human evolution didn’t happen.” I guess this shows that shoes never changed because people still wear sandals.

    “. . . human evolution has been refuted and it’s done like dinner, it needs to be taken out of schools.” The only way this statement could be supported is if you ignored the body of mainstream science, and all the evidence for evolution, and stick with the alternative creationist view which has zero objective evidence, and which contradicts known facts.

    “. . . goes to show that it takes a LOT of faith to believe that the universe came into existence uncaused, that life came from non-life, that minds evolved from molecules, and that personal beings came into existence from impersonal causes.” It takes no ‘faith’ – belief when there is no evidence. There is plenty of evidence for evolution – try Talk Origins, or the journals Science, or Nature, etc. I sure would like to know any objective evidence to the contrary. As far as I know, there is no objective evidence for creation. Even more, young earth creationism is just silly. And intelligent design is too easy to debunk.

    “A little child is more rational than an adult.” Really? Really?

    “and he never lies.” Children learn to lie very early. One study even claimed that the earlier a child learned to lie, the more intelligent.

    “and is not influenced by scientific knowledge or by religious theology.” Totally unsupported by parental experience and scientific research. In fact, then, the folks selling this product are really wasting their time:

    “Babies and young children can learn anything, especially when they are having fun! This DVD [Creation for Little Sprouts] will help your child learn about the Sun and Moon, Stars and Galaxies, Birds and Bats, Fish and Whales, Octopuses and Jellyfish … and especially God, the Creator. Incorporating classical music, original sing-along songs, live action video and American Sign Language, this attention-grabbing DVD will delight young children while supporting biblical creation.” Interest level: Ages 2-5.

    • WorldGoneCrazy

      ‘“Meanwhile, living fossils demonstrate human evolution didn’t happen.” I guess this shows that shoes never changed because people still wear sandals.’ This statement is utter nonsense, with all due respect, my friend: it wrongly redefines Darwinian evolution as “change over time.” No one disputes that “change over time” occurs – I am not aware of anyone arguing against this concept. (Certainly we all change over time, but we remain specific human beings despite these changes.)

      Nor do most people dispute the concept of micro-evolution or adaptability, say, of the sort that Darwin reported regarding the adaptation of the beaks of finches. (The beaks evolved in a micro sense, but the finches remained finches – that is NOT Darwinism, not even close.)

      Darwinism, or macro-evolution, is the “change over time” of one kind into another. Such a concept would be akin to the shoe evolving into a car, which I am assuming that you are not asserting! 🙂 Darwin himself admitted that he had no data to support macro-evolution (what is now called Darwinism), in light of the sudden Cambrian explosion of life, which even the most atheistic biological scholar fully accepts. Darwin prayed that the fossil record would someday confirm what he had no evidence for, but, sadly, for the naturalist, the resulting fossil record over the past 150 years has failed utterly in this regard, despite being considered all but complete, by most paleontologists.

      Your analogy actually fails in an even more fundamental way: the “evolution” of shoes over time was accomplished by human beings altering the design of shoes using their brains. You have inadvertently made a very good case for intelligent design, for which we all thank you heartily! 🙂 It is not a long or difficult journey from the acceptance of intelligent design to the Christian God of the Bible. Please maintain a sincere search for the truth, even if it requires you to give up the presupposition of naturalism, and God will surely reward your sincerity. Many blessings to you!

      • Sometime ago I saw a PBS show on the ‘return to Darwin’s island’ narrated by Alan Ladd. When it was all over, all they had shown was micro-evolution, but they ended on a note as if they had proven macro-evolution.

        • WorldGoneCrazy

          Oh yeah: “the bird beaks changed, therefore humans are fish!” If you haven’t seen the video “evolution vs. God” on Living Waters, I highly recommend it. You will actually see UCLA biology professors saying the craziest things.