I wonder on what grounds the rest of the countries in the world are excluded from this graph. Perhaps because these are the countries in which the "do you believe in evolution" survey has happened? But it doesn't say that, which leaves me with just the sneaking suspicion that the graph might turn out to look a lot more haphazard with a full set of data, and that the data points shown might have been cherry-picked to give a misleading impression.
The summary on Science's website of the original paper (all that's accessible without payment) says "The acceptance of evolution is lower in the United States than in Japan or Europe, largely because of widespread fundamentalism and the politicization of science in the United States." (That's the whole summary).
I'm pretty sure that means that any cherry-picking has gone on, if at all, in the original article. (The big ones I'd be interested in are Canada, Australia and New Zealand)
I read once, and I can't remember where, that there is a direct correlation between declining belief in heaven, and the presence of retirement benefits.
True. Might as well have no line at all, and simply point out that more science correlates with more money in all but one case - and that one case is 0.1% of it's population away from being somwhere to the left of Turkey.
It's even sadder if you live here. This is a nation where I consider around 20-25% of the population to be dangerously delusional (IOW religious extremism and religious bigotry are central to their worldview, and they also tend to believe oddities like the US president is a Muslim who was born in Kenya). I rather suspect those numbers are considerably lower in other developed nations.
no subject
no subject
I'm pretty sure that means that any cherry-picking has gone on, if at all, in the original article. (The big ones I'd be interested in are Canada, Australia and New Zealand)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
http://bigthink.com/ideas/21147
no subject
no subject
um that means tory versus um... not tory... commie?
no subject
no subject
no subject
A straight line would have been easier...
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
given that 80% of US money is in the top few % of people, that's a massive factor
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
(Canada also would buck the line, I suspect. We've got tons of ignorant people *and* a decent GDP.)
no subject
no subject
no subject