Creation, or Evolution?
Gallup LIES, Again!
It's Gallup's own poll on evolution which makes the headline "On Darwin�s Birthday, Only 4 in 10 Believe in Evolution" a LIE!
The "theory of evolution" is that "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this process" which their OWN polls show only 9-11% (currently 9%) believe. What is NOT the "theory of evolution" is that "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process", which is the 40% of Americans who Gallup lumps in with the 9% of evolutionists to create this FALSE headline.
Evolutionists do NOT believe in God, and therefore to NOT believe that God could ever have done anything, much less bother to have "guided the process". If you even have the slightest suspicion that God did this, you are a CREATIONIST, not an EVOLUTIONIST. Only if you reject the entire concept of the existence of God can you claim that you believe in "evolution".
So let's rewrite Gallup's headline:
On Darwin�s Birthday, Even After Decades of Leftists Cramming Evolution Down Our Christian Children's Throats, Only ONE in 10 Believe in Evolution
On Darwin�s Birthday, Only 4 in 10 Believe in Evolution
Belief drops to 24% among frequent church attenders
PRINCETON, NJ -- On the eve of the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth, a new Gallup Poll shows that only 39% of Americans say they "believe in the theory of evolution," while a quarter say they do not believe in the theory, and another 36% don't have an opinion either way. These attitudes are strongly related to education and, to an even greater degree, religiosity.
There is a strong relationship between education and belief in Darwin's theory, as might be expected, ranging from 21% of those with high-school educations or less to 74% of those with postgraduate degrees.
Those with high-school educations or less are much more likely to have no opinion than are those who have more formal education. Still, among those with high-school educations or less who have an opinion on Darwin's theory, more say they do not believe in evolution than say they believe in it. For all other groups, and in particular those who have at least a college degree, belief is significantly higher than nonbelief.
Darwin's theory has been at the forefront of religious debate since he published On the Origin of Species 150 years ago. Even to this day, highly religious individuals claim that the theory of evolution contradicts the story of creation as outlined in the book of Genesis in the Bible.
Thus, it comes as no surprise to find that there is a strong relationship between church attendance and belief in evolution in the current data. Those who attend church most often are the least likely to say they believe in evolution.
Previous Gallup research shows that the rate of church attendance is fairly constant across educational groups, suggesting that this relationship is not owing to an underlying educational difference but instead reflects a direct influence of religious beliefs on belief in evolution.
Younger Americans, who are less likely to be religious than those who are older, are also more likely to believe in evolution. Still, just about half of those aged 18 to 34 say they believe in evolution.
Awareness of Darwin's Association With Evolution
Before respondents in the current poll were asked about their belief in evolution, they were tested to see whether they could correctly associate evolution with Darwin. The results show that 55% of Americans can correctly name evolution (or another term closely associated with evolution, such as natural selection) when asked with which theory they associate Darwin.
Again, as would be expected, correct identification of Darwin with his scientific theory is highly related to education.
Correct identification zooms from only 31% among those with no more than a high school education all the way to 86% among those with postgraduate educations.
Americans who seldom or never attend church are slightly, but not overwhelmingly, more likely to correctly identify Darwin with this theory than are those who attend more often.
Correctly identifying the theory of evolution with Darwin is related to belief in the theory, but 29% of those who correctly link the two still say they do not believe in evolution. Of those who don't know or are unsure which theory Darwin is associated with, almost two-thirds also don't have an opinion on evolution, while those who do have an opinion are split down the middle as to whether they believe it.
As Darwin is being lauded as one of the most important scientists in history on the 200th anniversary of his birth (on Feb. 12, 1809), it is perhaps dismaying to scientists who study and respect his work to see that well less than half of Americans today say they believe in the theory of evolution, and that just 55% can associate the man with his theory.
Naturally, some of this is because of educational differences. Americans who have lower levels of formal education are significantly less likely than others to be able to identity Darwin with his theory, and to have an opinion on it either way. Still, the evidence is clear that even to this day, Americans' religious beliefs are a significant predictor of their attitudes toward Darwin's theory. Those who attend church most often are the least likely to believe in evolution, and most likely to say they do not believe in it.
Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,018 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 6-7, 2009, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is �3 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
The Criminal Gallup Organization
The Gallup Organization is yet one more mainstream American media source which is controlled by and/or advancing the destructive liberal/feminist/jew/nwo/zionist/sodomite agenda
The most egregious act that any person, agency, organization, or society could ever participate in is to LIE about the reason for the loss of 40 million human lives. The worst crime committed by Gallup is their word-mandering in their abortion poll. Someone who doesn't take the time to read their poll would not easily detect that only 22% of Americans supported abortion on demand in 1976 and that only 26% support it today, which is the only effect of the Roe vs. Wade ruling. More than 39.6 million of the 40 million abortions since then were abortion on demand rather than medical or legal necessities, during which time the percentage of Americans who supported this slaughter never exceeded 34%:
Even worse is that Gallup once had a section on their poll which showed that 48% of Americans believe that abortion is *murder*. You know there is something very, very wrong when 136 million Americans believe that the 40 million babies killed in abortions were *murdered* by their very own government--and when evidence of that fact mysteriously disappears with no explanation.
Forget what your opinion of abortion is. The simple fact that this many Americans view the policies of their very own government as *murder* of 40 million potential fellow Americans is a horrendous thought. What could a government possibly do for its constituents to make up for something like this? And why did Gallup willingly participate in a cover-up of the evidence?
Instead of presenting this evidence in an objective manner to the American public, they removed it from their web site. When asked 'why", they resonded "we don't change our web site around", and "we plan to start charging for people to view previous poll results". iow, they LIED. It can be proven that they did change the web site because a copy of the original poll will forever be at http://fathersmanifesto.net/abortiongallup.htm . This is proof that Gallup is not merely a bystander in the anti-Christian media campaign being conducted by jews--they are the leader of it. When they did this, they proved that they're an advocacy group, not an objective polling organization. Because of such egregious advocacy by our putative "free press", politicians were unable to respond to the half of Americans who are horrified by what they consider to be the wholesale murder of 40 million potential fellow Americans, and instead supported the most amoral 26% of the population whose agenda is an abomination before God.
Why would this organization be an advocacy group for abortion? Why would they try to cover up their role in it? Why do they never poll people about their religious preference, and instead cloak this question in a survey of "church membership", which means that they don't even know the religious preferences of 28 million Americans who are not members of organized churches, who are most likely Christians?
SPOKEN CHRISTIAN PRAYER IN PUBLIC SCHOOL
Why do other polls consistently show that 80-90% of Americans want spoken Christian prayer in public schools, whereas theirs shows only 70% want "spoken" [not "spoken Christian" ] prayer?
Why are their sodomy polls so far off the mark? A Gallup Poll in 1999 showed that only 43% of Americans opposed legalized "homosexual marriages", even though voters in state after state, before and after that poll, implemented "anti-gay marriages" statutes in numbers almost three quarters greater than Gallup predicted. 70% of the voters in some states voted for these pro-marriage laws which organizations like Gallup characterized as "anti-marriage laws". Polling the American public can't be that difficult, particularly when so many other credible pollsters are getting it right.
Perhaps Gallup's most disingenuous, most biased, most anti-Christian poll is the August 30, 1999 poll that asked the following question:
Which of the following statements comes closest to your views on the origin and development of human beings --
This is an intentionally misleading question. The Holy Bible describes a genealogy of human beings that may not span more than 3,000 years, so anyone familiar with the Holy Bible (like perhaps the 264 million Americans who proclaim, when asked, that they're Christians) can't answer any of these question honestly. It's true that 3,000 years is "within the last 10,000 years", but the wording causes misleading responses even though someone may 100% accept creation by God as described in the Holy Bible.
It's disingenuous to ask a Christian whether or not God "guided" a process "over millions of years" when most Christians don't even accept a figure longer than 6,000 years. Such wording enables "evolutionists" to proclaim that 49% of Americans "believe in evolution", which is an inaccurate assessment. Even with this biased, anti-Christian phrasing of the questions, only 9% of Americans claimed that they believe that life was created by "evolution" rather than by God.
How many Christians would answer such a question this way simply because it "comes closest" to their views, but still doesn't accurately represent their actual opinion? From this single question, we just don't know, and no Gallup Poll ever answers that question definitively. Their previous question gets us closer to the truth, but it still avoids that key question:
Next, I'm going to read you some areas of instruction the high schools might offer. Please say whether you think each one should be required instruction, could be offered as an elective but should not be required, or should not be taught at all. How aboutThe theory of creationism
The correct term is "creation", not "creationism", which makes any respondent who answers affirmatively to appear to be a member of a minority sect of some kind. At least we get the impression from this answer that 25% want instruction in creation to be required, and another 56% want it to be offered but not required, for a total of 81% who want creation to be taught in public schools (and who didn't mind putting themselves in the category of a radical "creationist"). But it still leaves an unknown percentage who certainly responded negatively due just to the wording of the question.
Precisely how many of them actually "believe in creation" is still impossible to answer, requiring us to refer to yet another Gallup Poll which shows that 86% specify that they are members of a Christian church, and 9% specify "none" when asked which church they belong to. This is equally misleading, because we don't know what portion of the 9% are Christians like Thomas Jefferson who definitely were or are Christians but don't belong to organized churches.
We do know that a minimum of 86% and up to 95% of Americans are Christians, and that it's Christians who learn about creation from the Holy Bible, but we still don't know exactly what percentage "believe in creation".
The expertise with which Gallup avoided answering this simple question suggests that nine out of ten Americans "believe in creation" [read: are Christians], and thus are being denied one of the most fundamental rights of religious freedom.
So why do Gallup's polls on "gender differences" show the same blatant bias? Why would Gallup make the following blatantly false statement:
Gallup's very own data shows that men are 1.4 times more likely than women to believe that men are more ambitious, 1.2 times more likely to believe that men are more easy-going, and twice as likely to believe that men are more intelligent, but women are 1.1 times more likely to believe that women are more easy-going, 1.3 times more likely that women are more ambitious, and 1.5 times more likely to believe that women are more intelligent.
iow, this statement is a LIE. Gallup itself misrepresented it's own data! These are not minute differences--these are the differences which God established, for a purpose.
In the last fifty years, their "polls" have consistently underestimated public support for Republicans and overestimated public support for Democrats--a fact of life which should be anathema to putative statisticians. They estimated that Clinton would get 49% of the 1992 vote, but he got only 43.2%, an over-representation of 5.8%. They estimated that Reagan would get only 47% of the 1980 vote, but he got 59.1%, an under-representation of 3.8%. Overall in the last fifty years this consistent media bias has added up to underestimating Republicans by 4.6% and overestimating Democrats by 7.3%, which is an 11.9% difference. Yet Gallup proclaims that their polls are accurate to within plus or minus 2%--a claim which constitutes nothing less than consumer fraud.
Why bother to pretend to be "unbiased"? Why pretend that they take a lot of pride in the "objectivity" of their polls? Christians in this country know if not sense that they STINK to High Heaven. They have yet to conduct an "objective" sodomy poll, instead asking softball questions like "do you think homosexuals should or should not have equal rights", to which they get an 83% positive response. Even Christians who are obligated by the Holy Bible to uphold sodomy laws would answer "yes" to such a softball question.
By chronically misrepresenting American mainstream opinion by this much, and by putting their own opinions on a higher priority than the facts, Gallup has become a pawn if not a leader in the destruction of American politics. Their polls are cited by many American publications, which misleads entire segments of American voters.
Why do they do this? Votescam might have the answer:
Prejudice -- To decide beforehand; to lean in one favor of one side of a cause for some reason or other than it's justice. Reference: Bouvier's 8th -- 1859
Do The Math: Election Returns Don't Add Up By James Collier http://www.votescam.com/frame.html
The seeds for the rigging of 1996 primaries were planted in 1964 when, within months of the JFK assassination, a power frenzy was unleashed in Washington. The CIA, FBI and the nation's most powerful media heads met in secret. The media agreed not to challenge the Warren Commission's preposterous conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman. In return, the media gained the right to be the official vote-counting apparatus for presidential elections. This incident was doc- documented in reports from the Air Force Staff College and American University. The deal was struck and News Election Services (NES) was founded. Today, that network pool of NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, AP, the New York Times, Washington Post and others has a tote-board at 225 W. 34th St. in New York City. When Brokaw, Jennings, Rather and CNN tell the public on election night, at 7:01 pm EST, "We are the first with the most," they all lie. Just like Pravda, they get the same numbers from the NES board. The networks also own the exit-polling unit, Voter Research and Survey (VRS). That allows them to announce who won the presidency at 7:01 p.m., before a single vote is counted. The numbers do not change, and are always 100 percent correct. NES merged with VRS and is now known as Voter News Service (VNS). The networks want us to believe that people vote in the same percentages in every precinct across the country. Thus, an exit poll in Maine is representative of us all. Once that one magic precinct in Maine votes, the remainder of the country may just as well have stayed home, because the numbers will not change from coast to coast. Against this backdrop, we now examine a few curious events that took place during this primary season. Iowa -The media told us at 6:55 p.m. on the evening of the Iowa caucuses that it knew the final vote totals based on "entrance polls' " Not a single vote had been cast (unlike a regular primary, voting starts not in the morning but at 7 p.m.)
People were still parking their cars, and witnesses reported that nobody filled out entrance polls. The paper ballot vote started sometime after 7 p.m. Sen. Bob Dole won. The next day the Iowa papers ran the VNS totals. Observers noticed that Pat Buchanan's vote was shaved by 100 to 150 votes per county from what they knew he received the night before, and they called county election supervisors to ask: "When is the election going to be certified?" The answer: "We don't know, maybe in April... the media hasn't told us yet." Election supervisors had told precinct captains to "throw away your totals, we aren't officially recording them this year.. the media will tell us what the totals are" And that's how you rig a paper-ballot election. Arizona- VNS projected Buchanan the winner, but Steve Forbes won. The next day the networks apologized for the first time since the consortium was formed. They said their exit poll must have been wrong. Here's what our investigation has thus far uncovered: Sometime during the after- noon in Maricopa County (Phoenix), ballot boxes were removed by people claiming to be from the Election Supervisor's Office. "We need to get a jump on the vote count," the precinct workers were told. New boxes were already in place. No questions were asked. Also, roughly 219,000 voters (out of 1.2 million registered) were issued plastic laminated vote cards that were punched when they voted, so that nobody could vote twice on the same card. However, it seems that 60,000 additional cards were issued to "special" voters who were heard bragging in vote lines that they could vote twice without being caught. The election supervisor's office in Maricopa County issued a report stating that only two of the 60,000 extra ballots were voted. According to Yvonne Reed, assistant county recorder, 10 people were hired after the election to hand record 219,000 seven- digit voter ID numbers into a computer. Reed said the computer showed that only two voters had their numbers entered twice, and those votes were dropped from the total. The 10 employees worked three 12- hour days, with two half-hour breaks, Reed said. Do the math: Roughly 220,000 cards divided by 10 workers equals about 22,000 cards. Multiply 22,000 cards by 7 digits in each card and you get 154,000 digits. That means each worker entered about 50,000 digits a day. There are 60 minutes in an hour. To accomplish the task, one would have to enter more than 4,000 digits an hour non- stop for 12 hours a day, or more than one keyboard strike per second. Unlikely, to say the least. Reed refused to give the name of the 10 people. She said it was not public information. "Yes it is," I said. "They were paid with taxpayers' dollars." A citizen's investigation is pending.
It seems that 60,000 additional cards were issued to "special" voters who were heard bragging in vote lines that they could vote twice without being caught.
WHO COUNTS THE AMERICAN VOTE?
Despite the wide-spread, and perfectly reasonable belief that the government counts the national vote on election night, the reality is entirely different: The vote is counted by a little-known private corporation named Voter News Services (VNS) located in New York City. VNS is a major media conglomerate comprised of all the major networks, including Fox and CNN, and also the wire services, the New York Times, and the Washington Post. All of the vote results tabulated in each county, mainly by computer, are transferred to VNS where they are tabulated in secret and disseminated to the public, who accepts them without question. The computer tabulated votes at the county level leave no paper trail. Only the corporations who program the software to count votes in each state know for sure if the results are fair, or if fraud has indeed been been committed. There are no checks and balances. The software is not open to public scrutiny. Neither is VNS.
Created in 1970 as News Election Services (NES), VNS has existed in near total secrecy for thirty years and may well be the most powerful corporation in the world. Most people who know of their existence incorrectly believe they are little more than a polling organization. The fact is that they have co-opted the vote count in America, despite their claims that the results they disseminate are "unofficial." These results are accepted across the board on election night by Americans and election officials. VNS is very well aware of this uncontested power. They know that very few Americans have the time or inclination to challenge the vote count. They also know that when they are challenged, they have little to fear. Understandably, they have responded to accusations of vote fraud with the arrogance befitting the power of a private and unaccountable media corporation.
On May 18th, E. Baylis, a reporter for the Asheville Global Report called VNS and requested information about their organization. Ms. Baylis spoke with Lee C. Shapiro, the press secretary for VNS. The simple conversation was quickly aborted when Baylis asked if a citizen watchdog group existed to oversee the function of VNS on election night. Shapiro replied that she was "not going to get into this with you," and insisted she had a meeting to attend.
On May 20th, another Global Report writer, Victoria Collier, called VNS. She was told that Ms. Shapiro was in a meeting. Collier asked only one question: if there was any literature about VNS that could be sent through the mail, such as a brochure. The secretary had no answer, then put her on hold for nearly five minutes. The next person to appear on the other end of the line was the head of VNS himself, Bill Headline. He wanted to know why she was calling. The following is the transcript of the ensuing conversation.
(Editors note- The stuttering and stammering on the part of Bill Headline offered Collier ample time for transcribing the conversation as it took place, but has been largely edited for the sake of the reader. What remains is necessary to give you a feeling for his extreme nervousness.)
Blood in the Streets?
While Gore supporters are holding protests in the
streets, Bush supporters