New Gallup poll shows 40% of Americans are dumb as dirt

by Ben Hoffman

Four in 10 Americans Believe in Strict Creationism

PRINCETON, NJ — Four in 10 Americans believe God created humans in their present form about 10,000 years ago.

Source

So why do we even bother trying?

Advertisements

49 Comments to “New Gallup poll shows 40% of Americans are dumb as dirt”

  1. It’s a crazy world. Some people actually think that the universe came into being without a cause — or better yet, that gravity caused it (uh, where did that pesky gravity come from then?!). And they think that life came from non-life and evolved into elephants, caterpillar / butterflies and Angelina Jolie. They think that impossibly complex, highly ordered data just evolved as well. It is a strong delusion, but completely explained in Romans 1 and the rest of the Bible.

    Sadly, governments actually hire these people to teach children.

    • Gravity caused the universe? That’s a new one. 🙂

      Some of us have evolved, some rely on some writings from some 2,500 years ago to explain things. That must make life real simple. There’s no need to study science. God did it! 🙂

      • See Stephen Hawking and his fans for the “gravity caused the universe” nonsense. Glad you can see how ridiculous he is.

        The rest of your comment was pure straw man. I know a “few” Christians and none oppose science. They just see how ridiculous the philosophy of materialistic naturalism is and how it has perverted ONE part of ONE of the ~40 branches of science.

        But how convenient to try and dismiss all your ideological foes by claiming they are completely anti-science, eh?

      • Religion IS anti-science. There is no evidence whatsoever that god exists other than some books written thousands of years ago.

    • Some people actually think that the universe came into being without a cause

      Some people actually think a sky-daddy is out there caring for their own personal well being, watching their every move and determining if they will burn in hell forever.

      Of the two statements, reality coheres with the first much more than the second.

  2. Oh, and even if the foolishness of Darwinian evolution was true then it would be 100% responsible for all religious views. So someone would have to be pretty stupid to be prideful and mock others for their religious beliefs, eh?

    • Religion was invented to explain things people didn’t understand. It’s like my dog doesn’t understand thunder so she’s afraid of it. People didn’t understand the world and the universe and they were afraid — thus the need for religion and gods.

      Today, most people outgrow belief in the supernatural because there are logical explanations for most things.

    • even if the foolishness of Darwinian evolution was true

      Never let evidence get in the way of a good argument.

  3. “Religion IS anti-science. There is no evidence whatsoever that god exists other than some books written thousands of years ago.”

    1. The age of a writing is irrelevant to its veracity.

    2. If a book about God was true you would expect it to be old.

    3. There is much evidence for God’s existence: Teleological, cosmological, logic, morality, beauty and more — see http://rationalperspective.wordpress.com/theism/ for examples . Yes, I know some of those just support theism in general and not necessarily the God of the Bible.

  4. So do you feel the same about the Qur’an?
    Are you will to be so snotty and condescending to Muslims?
    Or the Tipitaka?
    Bahgavad Ghita
    The Vedas has 4 parts:

    1) samhita .

    2) brAhmaNa.

    3) Aranyaka .

    4) upanishat .

    Or The Torah?

    Just to be “fair” 🙂

  5. “Isn’t that what he did, since man had already been around for over 3,000 years when the Old Testament was written?”

    You should read more carefully. I said, “You would expect God to interact with his creation from the beginning.” And He did.

  6. Who said he stop interacting with people now? He still interact with people who acknowledge him.

  7. And there are Socialist Liberals who think they are mature and smarter than everyone else.
    Now that’s a DELUSION! 🙂

    • Socialist Liberals

      You make that sound like a bad thing considering jebus was quite the socialist himself sharing all those magic loaves and fishes… 🙂

      who think they are mature and smarter than everyone else.

      Just those who believe in magic and mythology. Are you a fan of Zeus? Now there is a godhead I can get behind. 🙂

      • Then I guess it’s a dirty rotten shame I’m not a ?”loaves and fishes” Christian then your childish condescending might actually hurt.
        But as it is, I’m not a Christian and Liberals are still Socialists. 🙂

      • I’m not a Christian

        Congratulations.

        Liberals are still Socialists

        *sigh*

        I highly doubt the veracity of this statement,as all Liberals are certainly not socialists. Just as all conservatives are not all fascists.

      • Conservatives fall several categories: religious nuts, people whose only concern is their tax rates, racists, the addle-minded who get their “news” and opinions from Glenn Beck and his ilk, and corporatists. There are also the simple-minded right-wing ideologues whose views have little to no grounding in reality.

      • The you better talk to the creator of this website. He has some serious issues…

  8. When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

    “After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”

    Pelosi has served as speaker in the 110th and 111th Congresses.

    “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”- Nancy Pelosi, 2007 inauguration speech.

    At the close of business on Jan. 4, 2007, Pelosi’s first day as speaker, the national debt was $8,670,596,242,973.04 (8.67 trillion), according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department. At the close of business on Oct. 22, it stood at $13,667,983,325,978.31 (13.67 trillion), an increase of 4,997,387,083,005.27 (or approximately $5 trillion).
    WHOOPS!
    More than half of lending under the Fed’s term auction facility – the largest of its crisis programmes – went to foreign banks. Details of the varied uses to which they put it may add to political criticism of the Fed.

    The Taf was set up in December 2007 to provide one-month loans to creditworthy banks as markets dried up for lending longer than overnight. In August 2008, it began offering three-month loans as well.

    Rabobank of the Netherlands and Toronto-Dominion of Canada, two of the only banks in the world with triple A credit ratings, used more than $20bn in cumulative Taf loans.

    Ed Clark, TD chief executive, said that using Taf was logical even though his bank never had a liquidity problem. “That wasn’t how we made a lot of money. But you make a dollar here, you make a dollar there. What’s the spread you make on a billion dollars?” he said.
    WHOOPS!
    For those who savor perverse policy incentives, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is a gift that keeps on giving.

    Today’s surprise is a counterintuitive tax that, under certain circumstances, is small for low- to middle-income families, bigger for high-income families, but biggest of all for those caught in the middle.
    WHOOPS!

    • [When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.]

      Well, you can’t say she hasn’t tried.

  9. “Conservatives fall several categories: religious nuts, people whose only concern is their tax rates, racists, the addle-minded who get their “news” and opinions from Glenn Beck and his ilk, and corporatists. There are also the simple-minded right-wing ideologues whose views have little to no grounding in reality.”

    Yes, Conservatives are racist! Recently a group of 99% conservative whites raises money to literally destroy group of 76% blacks (http://tinyurl.com/25gllvf). If that isn’t the sickest form of racism then I don’t know what is. This should be front-page news for weeks.

    Oh, wait. They were Liberals, not Conservatives. Never mind.

    (The other pejoratives can be refuted just as easily, but why bother with close minded bigots?)

    • Neil, you belong in a loony bin. 🙂

    • Oh, wait. They were Liberals, not Conservatives. Never mind.

      Another example is the Liberal policy of the minimum wage. It’s often described as the most racist law on the books. It directly leads to an elevated black teen unemployment rate which sets that population back in terms of “on the job experience”.

      Further, as a result of being unemployed, they resort to other activities that do not serve them well.

      Watch for the predictable response from our host as proof.

      • [Another example is the Liberal policy of the minimum wage. It’s often described as the most racist law on the books. It directly leads to an elevated black teen unemployment rate which sets that population back in terms of “on the job experience”.]

        By that logic, allowing the outsourcing of jobs overseas is racist.

      • By that logic, allowing the outsourcing of jobs overseas is racist.

        We’ve been over this. Companies that move jobs overseas hire MORE Americans than those companies that don’t.

      • [Companies that move jobs overseas hire MORE Americans than those companies that don’t.]

        So what. By sending jobs overseas, they’re creating unemployment here.

  10. “Neil, you belong in a loony bin.”

    Hey, maybe I do. Thanks for the winsome reply 😉 I also would have accepted something fact and reason based, but I’m just compulsive that way.

  11. “[Companies that move jobs overseas hire MORE Americans than those companies that don’t.]

    So what. By sending jobs overseas, they’re creating unemployment here.”

    1. But the net benefit is still there.

    2. Reduce corporate taxes to keep more jobs here. I saw many thousands of jobs leave Compaq / HP America and go to the Far East. The #1 reason, by far: Tax benefits.

    • [1. But the net benefit is still there.]
      Well, sure, the jobs they create here are better than nothing. On the same token, polluted air is better than no air.

      [2. Reduce corporate taxes to keep more jobs here. I saw many thousands of jobs leave Compaq / HP America and go to the Far East. The #1 reason, by far: Tax benefits.]
      That may be part of it, but the #1 reason is cheap labor. They can pay workers just a few dollars a day in China.

      • That may be part of it, but the #1 reason is cheap labor.

        Not true Ben.

        You can build two factories, factory A in China; Factory B here in the good ol’ USofA.

        You can run Factory A full time, day and night, every day of the week. Pay the people, pay for the raw materials, everything.

        Now, take Factory B here in the States. And let it sit empty. Not one hour of work, not one widget made.

        The check you write to keep Factory B open and VACANT is larger than the total cost of Factory A in China running full time.

      • [The check you write to keep Factory B open and VACANT is larger than the total cost of Factory A in China running full time.]

        That may be true, and it’s a good argument for tariffs.

      • That may be true, and it’s a good argument for tariffs.>

        At least you get the concept that one is cheaper than the other. Now, rather than raise impose tariffs, why not reduce taxes? How do you see it as a bad thing that I, a middle class schmucko, pay less for a good or service?

      • [Now, rather than raise impose tariffs, why not reduce taxes?]

        NEWS FLASH!!! WE’RE 14 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT!!! I REPEAT!!! 14 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT!!!

  12. I did literally dozens — perhaps hundreds — of financial analyses. There are many factors at play. Labor is one of them. The tax benefits of building in Singapore were like getting free labor and overhead. Saving a few bucks per hour wasn’t going to make that big of a difference on anything that had significant freight costs.

    And why do you hate Chinese people? Do you want them to starve? What is wrong with sending jobs to them?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: