One in seven Britons believe in creationism over evolution

Nearly a quarter of Londoners and one in seven people nationwide believe in creationism - the theory that life on earth was created by God and has always existed in its present form.

Almost 150 years after Charles Darwin published his groundbreaking work, On the Origin of Species, just 48 per cent of Londoners agreed there was enough scientific evidence to support his theory of evolution, according to a survey published today.

One in five Londoners had never even heard of Darwin and a similar number of adults in the north of England had no understanding of or had never heard of the term, “evolution”.

I wish people of all faiths, and none, could see that Evolution is not incompatible with the Bible, God or Christianity in general.

Jeez, I wonder why some people on here are starting to sound like Evangelical Protestants. :rotfl:

LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy - Pope Benedict XVI said the debate raging in some countries — particularly the United States and his native Germany — between creationism and evolution was an “absurdity,” saying that evolution can coexist with faith.

The pontiff, speaking as he was concluding his holiday in northern Italy, also said that while there is much scientific proof to support evolution, the theory could not exclude a role by God.

“They are presented as alternatives that exclude each other,” the pope said. “This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.”

The theory of evolution is not compatible with Christianity as shown by the biology textbooks used in schools:

[With thanks to reggieM]

Is this what we want taught to our kids?


Never had a problem with it and neither did our nuns way back when. Life comes from God. That is what is important. If it evolves over the eons, fine as long as you believe God created it.
And Evolution is a theory. I don’t believe the missing link has been found and it may never be found.
Science taught that Pluto was a planet. Now it has been discovered it isn’t a planet. Things change, new things are discovered. Must keep an open mind.

Actually, it very much is compatible with Christianity, when taken in the appropriate context (coincidentally, much like Sacred Scripture). It appears your issue seems to be the apparent randomness of evolution by natural selection, which is somewhat understandable. However, are we God? No. Therefore, can there not be some things that look completely random to us limited humans (mutation, radioactive decay, etc.) that would not be so for God? To us, from a purely scientific point of view, evolution by natural selection appears undirected. This does not mean that God is not directly involved in some way that is undetectable by modern scientific means.

Absolutely, if it is the truth. Jesus is the Truth, whether that truth is naturalistic (scientific) or spiritual.

I cannot accept this view. The textbooks give the average student the idea that man is nothing special and there is no divine plan. If science is neutral about the supernatural, why include such information in textbooks? The only conclusion I can draw is the writers seek to promote atheistic materialism.


God has provided us with so many things to ponder. I explained to my children and now my grandchildren that God created everything that was, is and will be. We might have to wait till we reach heaven to see if evolution is fact or theory. Once God created something God also programed into that created thing its ability to grow and change.

Isn’t God wonderful!!! Just look at a baby forming in the mother. The baby grows just like God intended. I believe the world and universe does so also.

God is wonderful!!!


I agree wholeheartedly that some biology textbooks promote atheistic materialism, and that is wrong. The fact that much of that philosophical garbage gets into textbooks is a shame. But students who have been taught to critically think should be able to wade through the philosophical muck and see the science for what it is.

The atheistic materialist philosophy is just one philosophy of many based upon the reality of evolution by natural selection. I, for instance, come to the exact opposite conclusion (that it is God’s tool for the origin and development of new life forms) based upon my knowledge and interpretation of the exact same data. Either way, both conclusions are philosophical and not scientific, and that is the point. You can’t blame science for the erroneous conclusions of its interpreters, much in the same way you can’t blame the Bible for the erroneous interpretations of many who read it.

Hope you had a wonderful 4th of July.:slight_smile:

I found this interesting podcast from Scientific American. The host is rather snotty but the guest, a psycholigist says it is unethical to try to force people to “believe” in evolution contrary to their religious beliefs and advocates just saying, “This is what scientists think and what you have to know to pass the test.”

She also states humans instinctively prefer teleological explanations, “The rain falls so plants can grow” rather than “rain falls due to water condensing in clouds”. Evolutionists fall into the same “story-seeking”, e.g. “the giraffe has a long neck to reach leaves on the higher branches” which is actually Lamarckian evolution and anathema to Darwin.

It being Darwin’s bicentenary, we recently took ourselves off to visit his hometown of Shrewsbury (which is, incidentally, a particularly good example of an old English town with the center relatively unspoiled by the barbarities of 20th Century ‘town planning’) in the county of Shropshire which is, itself, one of those lovely English rural counties where the landscape is lush with that ‘highly-manicured’ look that some parts of the country do so well.

It’s nice to see that there’s only another 1-in-7 to go.

I hope you had a wonderful 4th of July. The fact that such anti-God information appears in textbooks is far more than a shame, it is a clear atheist bias. It is a statement by the scientific community that it rejects God.

Souls are at stake. In an educational setting, trust must exist between teacher and student and textbook authors and teachers and students. The wrong message is being put out in support of the current heavy atheist marketing campaign. That’s why atheists are putting “Man created God” on the sides of buses. They want new recruits. And they believe science is on their side.


I agree that there is a clear atheist bias again in some areas of science, but certainly not all. And it is not just science that the atheist bandwagon jumps on–it is most of academia, even many theology programs and professors are staunchly atheist. I think it is a grossly erroneous overgeneralization to state that the scientific community at large promotes atheism. Evolutionary biologists make up a very small portion of the scientific community, and while evolution by natural selection may be supported by the majority of scientists, the majority of them do not buy into the “science proves there is no God” thesis.

Indeed, souls are at stake. Which is why it is more crucial than ever to have good catechesis and to stress to our youngsters that science is not in conflict with religion, and to show them why. Else they go off to college and get bombarded with the atheist propaganda that claims the argument is “either God or science.” The atheists believe that science is on their side, but the exact opposite is true. For if God made the universe, there is nothing found within science that could possibly contradict Him. Our young people need to know this.

Why did you ignore my reference to Nature? Are you missing the fact that scientists like Dawkins and Harris are promoting atheism? On this forum, a person claiming to be a scientist is posting this when I encourage him to look for God.

That is the atheist claim - the evidence points away from immaterial causes.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit