digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

1 in 5 Americans believe Sun revolves around the Earth. This explains a lot

eightballmagazine.com — For the democratic process to run properly it necessitates the voter to have some knowledge of what he is voting on. Sadly, that isn ’t how many American vote, as is obvious when during an election year people are talking about whether or not someone “looks presidential” and whether the person looks “likeable”.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jstohler, on 10/11/2007, -42/+543The Bush Administration is in the process of rounding up all those people and giving them Cabinet-level jobs.
    • Beshitehboss, on 10/11/2007, -57/+7
      I hope God will save and lead us. Amen!
      • DavidBGie, on 10/11/2007, -80/+3I hate liberals who think they are smarter than everyone else. Almost all libs have NO common sense. That's why they are all running off the cliff screaming about global warming. Yeah ... what a bunch of geniuses!
        • PinkoComrade, on 10/11/2007, -42/+4I love the Atheists on digg, if you want your religious comment to be dugg then you must god lowercase
        • Moocat, on 10/11/2007, -0/+23Hey David, at least stay on the same train buddy, both sides have admitting global warming exists at this stage in the game, the only contention is as to what causes it. It doesn't get any better than proving the article right in Digg comments :P
        • dacheetah, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18@pinko.
          God that is a stupid comment. (no pun inten... ah who am I kidding.)
          All athiests know that there is a difference between "God" and "a god", one being a proper-noun (a name) the other being a normal noun like cat or dog.
          Just because we deny that either exist doesn't mean we don't know the difference.
        • bluezinc, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I don't think believing the Earth revolves around the Sun is a "liberal" idea... it's kind of a fact. Check a book that doesn't rhyme with "Lible" and I'm pretty sure you'll see you are dumb.
      • NonZionist, on 10/11/2007, -11/+9By "God", I assume you mean the Almighty State and its War Machine.

        Yes, the State is very good at "Saving" us, "Saving" the world, and "Leading" us into the abyss.

        +(
        We destroyed the village in order to save it.
        )+
        -- U.S. colonel in Vietnam, as he looked out over the ruins of Ben Suc.

        The Unholy Trinity:
        * Father: Dick Cheney
        * Son: King George II
        * Unholy Spirit: William Kristol

        http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11204 -- Tom Lantos Democrats seek World War IV

        http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Neoconservative_hopes_prays_Bush_will_bomb_0530.html -- Podhoretz "hoping and praying" for more war

        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070610/ap_on_go_co/us_iran -- Sen. Lieberman calls for the U.S. to attack Iran

        .

        We Americans are "Modern", and therefore "Superior" -- or so we tell ourselves. But if we had a giant mirror reaching from coast to cost, we'd discover that we are actually living in the Middle Ages.

        Of course, we're more "Civilized" than the old Inquisitors. We're still burning witches and heretics -- next on our list is Iran -- but now we use "Shock and Awe", and maybe even a nuclear stake. Much more "Efficient".
        • makeitloud, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4You know, I bet you and I agree on just about everything that matters, but when you Capitalize Everything and "Put It In Quotes" and then use heavy-handed terminology like "Unholy Trinity" when referring to Dick Cheney, I bet you alienate a lot of people who might otherwise be inclined to listen to what you have to say. (Not that Dick Cheney isn't a total *****.) Also, I'm betting ***** was making a sarcastic joke. Could be wrong.
      • retral, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3Must be a poor sampling.. Sure if you go into a mcdonalds and ask if the sun revolves around the earth you'll get 1/5 (maybe even 1/3).. but if you do a random sampling the ratio would probably be much 'better'.
        • VinceNoir, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Keep telling yourself that if it makes you sleep better at night. The fact is that there has been an active campaign against intelligence. Why? Because intelligent and educated people aren't profitable to business. They won't be convinced that they need an SUV just because they can't "get off" or get their lover off in bed. Someone who isn't afraid to be intelligent and be obvious about it won't buy into the sales pressure and gimmicks that big business live on. Since people like that can't be easily marketed to, the easy solution is to breed idiocy. They've done a fine job.
        • bluezinc, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Don't hate on McDonalds workers. What makes you think you're better than they are?
        • BobTheFish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1There was no hate in retral's post, just generalisation. I assume it's based on the assumption not that they're inferior, but that they're less educated (because most people become educated in order to achieve jobs that pay higher than working at McDonalds).
      • TheWorm, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9No. That's the wrong way to go about things. We got ourselves into this mess. God isn't going to do *****. We have to solve our own problems and stop putting our faith in a concept that frankly has never been proven to help anyone.
    • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -4/+34In the process is an understatement. They're about done.
    • JohnboiWaltune, on 10/11/2007, -7/+122Don't laugh, it is possible to be homeschooled by Christian fundamentalists, get a law degree from Pat Robertson's "university", and go straight to work for the Bush administration... hundreds of people have done just that.

      http://www.rightwingwatch.org/2007/05/liberty_univers.html
      • shawnbttu, on 10/11/2007, -3/+71America - Home of the Brave, Gullible and Incredibly Stupid
      • Charlotte_Web, on 10/11/2007, -19/+7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling

        Check out the chart, about halfway down. Homeschoolers tend to be MORE educated than non-homeschoolers. Also, the parents of homeschoolers have a higher than average income, and are more likely to have advanced degrees.
        • archiesteel, on 10/11/2007, -2/+27I'll wager that those who are more educated were *not* homeschooled by Christian fundamentalists...
        • Christ0s, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Take a statistics class averages are almost always misleading
        • Tochi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9@Charlotte_Web

          Apparently this is why people believe the sun revolves around the earth... Reading Comprehension... From the article you posted:

          According to a 2000-2001 Barna survey,[27] 41 percent of homeschoolers are White, 29.5 percent are Black and 29.5 percent Asian. (These figures, if true, would be significant, since Whites make up 81.7 percent of the U.S. population, Blacks 12.9 percent, and Asians 4.2 percent[28]). The study indicated that home school parents are 39 percent less likely to be college graduates, 21 percent more likely to be married, 28 percent less likely to have experienced a divorce, and that the household income is 10% below the national average.
        • VinceNoir, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7The fact that you believe a higher income indicates intelligence tells me that you haven't thoroughly thought this through. Income is an indicator of intelligence in the same way that the popularity of a pornographic pop song is an indicator of the true talent and integrity of the artist. (ie. it's not an indicator of that at all, in case you missed the point.) (I love alliteration!)
        • orangekid13, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Where's the part about them being socially awkward, sheltered, elitist and generally annoying to be around.
          case in point, that spelling bee winner ***** bastard child
      • imperium2000, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5Misleading data. Have they compared the average of public school kids with parents from the same level of education and income as these home schooled kids?
        • johnhummel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3If they're as smart as Ms. Monica "I can't remember my name Senator" Goodling, does it matter how well they stack up at this point? Their shining star - the blond, Aryan ideal of womanhood, was shown to be an idiot, have a bad memory, and possibly be a liar just to "further the cause in the name of God", instead of serving her country.

          So who gives a ***** how the "home schooled by Christian fundamentalists law degree holders from Pat Robertson's university" are - because from what we've been seeing in government, they stink to high heaven.
      • dacjames, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3I was home schooled by Christian fundamentalists before High School, graduated with a 4.6, am well on my way to a 4-year degree in Computer Science (1st Generation, btw). And I've performed higher than average public school children in standardized tests my whole life. Homeschooling goes both ways though - my good friend hasn't really had any school past junior high and to this day she can't add fractions and has trouble with change (no joke). Homeschooling isn't all that different than public schooling except a bit nerdier on average.
        • epgyd, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Wait, are you telling me you did BETTER than the average public school children on standardized tests?

          Wow!
        • Matri, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5Wow, you scored 4.6 out of 4.0.

          What a "genius".
          /sarcasm
          • PoeticExplosion, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7"Weighted" and "5.0 scale" are words that come to mind as possible explanations.

            I'm also home schooled by conservative Christian parents. In my case it's working really well (35 on the ACT with about a week of test prep, and I'm a proud freethinker), but I know plenty of creepy conservative home schoolers as well.
          • DYMongoose, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I was a creepy conservative home schooler. I had about 2 friends from 5th grade through 11th. My parents wanted me to go to Bob Jones University. I did not. I went to Ole Miss instead. I made a lot of friends and even joined a fraternity.

            Creepy in High School != creepy forever.
        • bluezinc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Actually, on the average, it's not better for the kids. The kids coming out without being indoctrinated is the exception and not the rule. Especially fundamentalist upbringing which discourages independent thinking and questioning, the two basic necessities to intelligence.
    • Benadrit, on 10/11/2007, -21/+7Sorry about the bury. Was supposed to be digg, but had a glitch. again, sorry. You're comment was not only astute but funny as well.
      • Lylepalooza, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3Wow, I just Dugg your comment (right green hand) and you got burried, wow. Maybe two people burried you just as I dugg you. Sucks.
      • oxdeltaxo, on 10/11/2007, -2/+20Never admit fault on the internet!!!!!!11!! Always go straight to flaming.
    • AsylumAleikum, on 10/24/2007, -44/+5Since when Bush gives Cabinet-level jobs to Democrats?
      • dacheetah, on 10/24/2007, -3/+18Since when grammar matter? I talk good Englishes coz I right wing. Right wing be opposite to wrong wing.
        • schmik07, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2You just nearly made me spit my coffee out! My boss is giving me funny looks now...
        • milliebubba, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I laughed out loud..
        • quik22, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1i didn't.
    • humperdeath, on 10/11/2007, -2/+43Idiots!
      The Sun revolves around the moon! Once every 28 days. it is obvious because that is how the moon changes its' phase from Full moon to half to quarter to no moon. Duh!
    • oxdeltaxo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2There ya go http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1996/05/24/MN67867.DTL happy?
    • Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/11/2007, -25/+0"Cabinet-level" lol your ignorance is showing. Keep pretending to be funny, you know I hear Al Franken needs a new joke writer.

      In other news, many more people believe we went to Iraq for oil. Stupidity, it seems, has various degrees. They should start referring to this level as "Sheehan-degree stupidity".
      • omarciddo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+15HAHA IGNORANCE LOLZ!

        It appears your defense mechanism is to attack others without proving us wrong. Can you prove we didn't go for oil?
        • Latentk, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Nice. I enjoy how you bring a question upon Vic's response, while clearly avoiding your own.
    • Viper244, on 10/11/2007, -13/+0Or it just proves that the people on digg don't know what they are talking about.
    • woobster, on 10/11/2007, -8/+101 outta 5 americans...including 5 year olds.
      • Endemoniada, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12Actually, the article specifically said "1 in 5 adults". Now, I don't know where your line for being an adult is drawn, but mine sure exceeds being five years old :)
        • woobster, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1sorry, i should of "Read the ***** article"
    • yahoofrom, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2is it Sun who revolves around Jin, or is it Jin who revolves around Sun?
    • fusion5, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Don't be silly, 1/5 is a pretty good value. If you take the people from where I live for example, I'm guessing that more than half are ignorant about the space, especially the uneducated people living in villages. You can't expect a 100% rate.
    • quik22, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1***** YOU JSTOHLER! =D
      • jstohler, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1465 diggs = I'm right.
        • quik22, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1WRONG, and that's the problem with you idiots. the number of uninformed liberals surrounding you has no correlation to whether or not you are right or wrong. do you look at a KKK meeting and say, "wow, their viewpoint must be correct."? with your logic, apparently you do.. ***** retard.
    • Smills, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I would believe this. I asked one of my Christian friends if he thought light was A: energy, B: a gas, C: a liquid, or D: a solid. He answered "a gas" I said no, he said "a liquid" I said no, he said "a solid" I said no, he said: "What the hell? It can't be energy because I can feel the temperature from it when I walk outside!"
      • quik22, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3what does that have to do with being christian? ***** retard.
  • rangerjoe8999, on 10/11/2007, -207/+221 in 5 libtards believe the sun, moon, and stars revolve around Ron Paul.
    • trghpy, on 10/11/2007, -57/+6Great comment, but it was bound for being buried.
      Libritarians are giving us liberals a bad name.
      I'm still wondering why nobody has commented on how extremist Ron Paul is.
      • jcounterman, on 10/11/2007, -6/+10Yeah, he's extremist, and everybody knows that. But they also know he doesn't stand a chance to make it past the primaries, let alone a general election; support for Ron Paul is more of a statement of change than actual support for the man.
        • pwill, on 10/11/2007, -6/+10No it's not. I honestly believe that he will receive the Republican nomination with active support from the People.
          • RandomGuySteve, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5That's.. that's cute. You must be grossly misinformed.

            1. He has no fund raising power. The other republican candidates can raise 10-20 times more money for their campaigns. That means more pamphlets, more phone calls, flashier public appearances, and a more experienced, professional campaign than him.

            2. He has no charisma. No talent for public broadcast. No name recognition. The two most used words when referring to him are "Ron who?"

            3. Its not him, it's us. We're probably too stupid/ too scared / too lazy to be interested in a new candidate, and we only have ourselves to blame when he doesn't get elected.
          • milliebubba, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Don't hold your breath.
      • PleaseJustDie, on 10/11/2007, -2/+22Because people wanting to have more freedom and less big brother and government wastefulness is soooooo extreme.
        • Gerz1219, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7The actions Ron Paul would have to take in office to support his ideals are, in fact, the very definition of extreme. Libertarian ideas would work best if one were creating a new government from scratch, much like the founding fathers did, because then the government wouldn't be encumbered by the baggage of an existing bloated infrastructure. Ron Paul, or any libertarian elected to the office of president, would be dealing with America as it is, not as it should be. The government is an elaborate web woven into the fabric of 300 million peoples' lives. It's one thing to say that the Federal Reserve is evil, has caused lots of economic difficulties throughout its existence, and that we should go back to the gold standard. It's another to actually put the country back on the gold standard and deal with the enormous havoc such a radical change would wreck on the economy in the short term. It's one thing to say that Social Security is an evil income redistribution scheme, and that everyone should just responsibly save for their retirements; it's quite another to abolish Social Security after several generations of people have paid over 12% of their income into Social Security their whole lives, money which has already been spent. We got a taste of this when Bush tried to privatize Social Security a couple years ago. The people completely revolted, and this is a democracy.

          Libertarian ideals presuppose that market forces will fix everything on its own without government intervention. But the unintended consequences of dismantling an enormous, haphazardly planned unfree market piece by piece could be enormous. Ron Paul talks a good game, but could he (or anyone) possibly have the managerial expertise to oversee such an unprecedented scale back of the government? Even assuming libertarians could get a mandate from the public, and a clear majority in Congress, he'd have one term to prove his ideas. I'd say he'd manage to privatize the post office and cut federal school funding, encounter massive resistance from the military-industrial complex, and that's about it. Of course, none of this is going to happen, so it's all a hypothetical exercise.
          • silencerider151, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Agreed. Ron Paul would need 30 years in office to effect all the changes necessary to bring America back to its origins.

            But perhaps if Ron Paul does get elected, it will lead to libertarians getting elected again and again, each being able to effect change and eventually we can be as proud to be Americans as we once were.
        • jayguy01, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Ron Paul has stated at least a couple time in his speeches that he would take things very slowly. He's not some nut who thinks he can get into the white house and abolish the federal reserve in one day. The man would have four years possibly eight to accomplish this. Also he stated that if he was going to cut social security he would either refund the money or just use that money for people who payed into it to give them their social security while giving business and people an opportunity to start taking over that market.
          • Gerz1219, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Perhaps I exaggerated a bit too much in my post. I'm aware that Ron Paul is not a nut who would try to do these things in one day. My larger point was that when we're electing the president, we're electing the steward of a massive welfare state. I think it's best to elect someone qualified to run the government while tweaking it and chipping away at it, not someone with excellent ideas about how the government should be run in a utopia. Scaling back the government in any significant way would require a sustained generation-long commitment that's simply incompatible with the vagaries of our two-party system and four-year election cycles. And I find that Ron Paul does like to talk in hypotheticals about the evils of government far more than he can provide reasonable ways to shrink the government in real life, since any such attempt always encounters massive partisan opposition. He's a protest vote, and he knows it, and most people on digg should know it.
          • milliebubba, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1RP actually has introduced a bill in the House to abolish the Federal Reserve. Last week, it had NO co-sponsors.
      • PinkoComrade, on 10/11/2007, -6/+6Libertarians = American Liberty
        Liberals = Real Liberty
        • silencerider151, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Liberals = Real Liberty of the government to take all your money and give it to greedy politicians.
    • BESTenemy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8rangerjoe8999, believe there was an article about you hitting the front page just moments ago.

      http://www.navycs.com/gallery2/d/4367-2/loser.JPG
      • rangerjoe8999, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Funny, you ought to take that act on stage.
    • HunterTV, on 10/11/2007, -4/+475 in 5 neocons respond to rational arguments with personal attacks.
      • panholt, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6So what does that make you exactly?
      • Jaymoon, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3If you think that a rational argument involves random rants with profanity, in sentence form, thrown together to resemble paragraphs... Then the "neocons" are the least of your problems.
      • rangerjoe8999, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2That wasn't a personal attact, that was an all-encompassing statement. Learn the difference.
    • drgmdp, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1haha i fully disagree but it was a clever comment
  • wildfire, on 10/11/2007, -15/+107Please, you bastards revolve around me. (And no, I'm not Peter Griffin)
    • omarciddo, on 10/11/2007, -2/+23In Soviet Russia...yadda yadda yadda.
      • wildfire, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Can I get an overlords one as well, please?
        • celkin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I for one welcome our geocentric overlords.
          • D4r7h3v1l, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Dude, the universe isn't geocentric... it's MEocentric!
          • cjpro, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Then all of our measurements are wrong!
      • Fifthrayne, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Overlords! Can I get a RAMEN brother?
  • trghpy, on 10/11/2007, -35/+196Thats kinda funny because of all countries you'd think America would have a good grasp on gravity seeing how one in five Americans have small objects orbiting them.
    • mashw, on 10/11/2007, -29/+12Who the hell dugg that? It wasn't even a joke, it was essentially a reiteration and spelling out of the reference wildfire made.
    • Nitrodist, on 10/11/2007, -5/+10Cmon, it was funny, admit it!
      • po43292, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Dugg up because jokes are funnier the 2nd time.
    • Sixcolors, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That's how we solve our problems now? We insult people instead of doing something about it?
      • quik22, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1hmm.. maybe you're new here. Digg is full of uneducated liberal teenagers who are either unemployed or make near minimum wage... so you're going to run into the complaining/insulting without offering solutions a lot. enjoy your stay!
  • max420, on 10/11/2007, -69/+50This is funny because its true. Americans in general pretty stupid... compared to other countries. And, its mostly religions fault.

    Now I am not saying ALL Americans are stupid, cause that simply isn't true. Unfortunately however, a great majority is.
    • wayback09, on 10/11/2007, -33/+12I'd say Canadians have a greater percentage of stupid people then the US. A survey recently released stated nine out of ten Canadians are mentally retarded. You can find the proof in the survey posted above, the link is there.
      • wildfire, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15I laughed, I won't lie, but it's than and not then.
        • allatti2d, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5wildfire -
          Maybe wayback-09 meant to say "then" but just forgot the comma... as in, "Canadians have a greater percentage of stupid people, then the US."

          First Canada, then the U.S.? It could work.
        • bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2wildfire, i also believe that you just separated two independent clauses with only a comma. really now, there's no need to be a gammar *****.
      • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Link please, couldn't find anything supporting that. And I must say, from my trips to Canada the only reason I would think the people are retarded is if I didn't recognize French as French and thought they all spoke gibberish.
      • paul2112, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6That made my day.
      • Scheissen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Oh Kanaduh!
    • Sean23, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11I don't find this funny at all. This is embarrassing...
      • sancho320, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Is everyone taking these 'facts' for granted? I find it impossibly hard to believe that these numbers, especially the 1 in 5 statistic, are true. Maybe Mr. Steward has some research he could share with us.

        Edit: Sorry, Digg up kinseyincanada below.
      • Synthos, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4The article cites no facts, and even then polls can be ambiguously worded so that your first answer might be wrong, even though you mean a different answer.

        This is *****, so don't feel bad.
    • Beshitehboss, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7Stupidity =/= Spelling
    • Rolf58, on 10/11/2007, -7/+9In fact it's worse. You have more than 50% who vote a crook the second time even after 4 years of lies, deceit and failures... and than after almost 7 years 30% still think he is right !
      • luvs2spooge, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2You realize that not everyone that was eligible to vote did so in the 2004 elections, right? In reality, only about 60% of Americans over 18 voted.
        When you think about it this way, the 30% approval ratings make much more sense.
      • Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Clinton is out of office, get over it.
        • quik22, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1genius! yet, liberals are digging you down.. truth hurts i guess. ;)
    • catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1870% of diggers believe everything they read on internet blogs without sources. I don't know which is worse.
    • ziffel, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I think there's some truth in what Max420 posted. No, i don't think that "the great majority" of Americans are stupid, but I think the number is significant, and I do think that mainstream Christianity plays a large role in the ignorance that many Americans display. In his book, "Letter To A Christian Nation", author Sam Harris cites these Gallop poll numbers about the U.S. population:

      * only 12% believe that life on earth has evolved through an entirely natural process
      * 31% believe evolution is being 'guided by God'
      * 53% of Americans are biblical creationists, believing the earth is 6 to 10 thousand years old

      As is evidenced in the middle east, religious fundamentalism can and does play a huge role in holding back a society in many ways. This is one of the main answers i give when asked "why do you 'attack' religion/Christianity?' I "attack" it, because it's dangerous. It is anti-knowledge, anti-advancement.
      • halliburke, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0You make the assumption that a belief in the Bible and Christianity and an understanding of true science are mutually exclusive concepts. You'd be wrong, because many Bible-believing Christians are also scientists and citizens who have a strong grasp of science.
        • ziffel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Are you implying that the bible is scientifically accurate? belief in the bible requires you to believe the sky is made of water, bats are birds, the earth is 6000 years old, etc. Any kind of re-interpretation of it is just that, subjective interpretation, not what it actually says. The bible, and true science are mutually exclusive. I understand that a lot of liberal Christians these days think they two are compatible, but based on what the bible actually says ... they are not. I give very little credence to liberal interpretations, because there are so damn many of them. if God were translating his word to mankind (something the bible claims about itself), then why would he put the story into some subjective analogy, which could be interpreted in 1000 different ways. The bible is clear and concise in it's claims, and also dead wrong.
  • kinseyincanada, on 10/11/2007, -25/+246there is no way this can be true, most certainly some Americans believe this but the 1 in 5 has to be a skewed statistic, if anyone went to elementary school or even watched an episode of the magic school bus they know that the earth revolves around the sun.
    • Zarokima, on 10/11/2007, -20/+77Sadly, I think Magic School Bus is a bit too highbrow for many Americans.
      • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Hey I watched it... but then again i know that the universe revolves are god too... :)

        Seriously I went to NY public school and learned this in 1st grade how the hell don't other Americans know this?????
      • majinboy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12>>Seriously I went to NY public school and learned this in 1st grade how the hell don't other Americans know this?????
        I call that the Homer Simpson Syndrome. Every time such a person learns something new, it pushes out something old.
    • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -10/+75 I agree. I simply can not imagine 20% of the American population thinks this. It has to be a joke somewhere.
      • javip, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7ummm... Bush was voted into power.. TWICE
        most Americans don't 'believe' in evolution... 20% thinking the sun revolves around the earth actually seems like a low number to me
    • PigThief, on 10/11/2007, -5/+32Agreed. It's so easy to pass off false statistics, and this is just ridiculous. The article might have had more credibility without that one statistic.
    • jcounterman, on 10/11/2007, -3/+36It's all about how the damn question was asked and then how the responses were manipulated. It's to the point that I simply do not trust statistics drawn from surveys until I see the questions.
      • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5 69.2% of all lies, damn lies and statistics are made up on the spot.
    • Evacide, on 10/11/2007, -8/+6171% of all statistics are made up on the spot
      • Poppeseed, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20Fake. Last time I checked it was 67%.
      • chonlal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2and the other 40 percent are inaccurate :-)
    • JohnboiWaltune, on 10/11/2007, -7/+33Technically, the earth does not orbit the sun. Every object in the solar system, including the sun, orbits the solar system's center of mass. The center of mass is an imaginary point that happens to lie within the sun, because most of the solar system's mass is contained in the sun.

      This is why we can detect extrasolar planets, because they cause their solar system's center of mass to shift enough that the star's orbit around that point is detectable.
      • RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Well, if you want to get REALLY nitpicky, following that logic, everything in the universe orbits the one thing: the center of mass of all matter in the universe.

        But how can that be, since the universe is spatially unbounded?

        Hehehe... breaking people's minds....
        • xartemisx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5That's not technically true. Space is expanding at a rate that may be greater than the gravitational pull. I'd say at best that our solar system orbits the center of the Milky Way galaxy, but everything else on scales greater than that is up in the air.
    • Jevinskie, on 10/11/2007, -8/+20Sadly, the statistics are real. See http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/Courses/comm466/Miller%201998.pdf and http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/science/30profile.html?ex=1183780800&en=e3760aa7d1b5022a&ei=5070
    • oxdeltaxo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20There ya go http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1996/05/24/MN67867.DTL happy?
    • lilwagon, on 10/11/2007, -5/+22you vastly overestimate the intelligence of the average American.

      consider this: Surveys are also fairly consistent in their estimates of how many Americans believe in evolution or creationism. Approximately 40%-50% of the public accepts a biblical creationist account of the origins of life, while comparable numbers accept the idea that humans evolved over time. The wording of survey questions generally makes little systematic difference in this division of opinion.

      http://people-press.org/commentary/display.php3?AnalysisID=118

      This means that TWICE as many people believe in the "God created man in his image" FAIRY tale than believe that the earth orbits the sun (or its center of mass ... or whatever that geek said)

      The "fly over" is chock full of simpletons.

      • mtrip, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I've lived on each coast, and those people aren't any smarter. You have california on the one side (nuff said) and on the east coast? Florida. FLORIDA. That pretty much proves my case right there.
        • InfamousAtheist, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Honestly... stop generalizing. Your experience with .00005% of each of those state's populations hardly qualifies as a scientific study, and you should be smart enough to take a grain of salt with the sensationalist crap you see in the media. So Florida has had some very close elections mostly won by power hungry pricks... which were also rife with voter fraud and criminal interference with Democracy. Explain to me how the entire population is responsible for those crimes. Please?

          What about the 52%... oh wait, 49.999999% who voted for the losers of those elections?

          And those crazy California people... who elected a Republican governor (NOT an endorsement from me, for the record)... twice in a row. You know, since a whole .5% of the population lives near Huntington Beach and surfs all day, I suppose the whole state must endorse communism and secretly want to kill babies. I SAW IT ON TV!!!!

          Start thinking for yourself and recognize that this country is very divided. I'm well aware that we have more than our fair share of sheeple who refuse to or are unable to compare two sides of a debate. Our education system sucks, our reputation sucks, and our leadership sucks. I hate that the rest of the world thinks we're all ethnocentric morons, particularly because I am not. We also have many many people who do take advantage of their ability to think independently... but apparently you're not one of them.
    • digudown, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Its not about how many Americans know if earth goes around the sun, but how many believe in it. Just like many here believe in creationism/intelligent design without looking for or even asking for evidence.
      • oxdeltaxo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1No, knowing something always wins out over believing something.
    • resplence, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Of course this is true. I once met a girl who was an ok student, went to good schools all her life, and at the age of 20 still were surprised to find out the Sun is a star.

      I don't think it would be a stretch to find 20% of the population in the same situation.
    • mirunit, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4I agree, I am going to call BS on this one. Science in the United States really does need a revival though.
    • mesmeriffic, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11About 1 in 5 Americans still approve of Bush.

      I can believe this.
    • bovox, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6I read the actual paper. The question was NOT "The sun revolves around the earth. True or false." The actual question was: "The sun revolves around the earth once a year. True or false." It is a very different question that can mislead people. It is also a question which was asked quickly over the phone. A person may know that the earth revolves around the sun, but when given the question quickly they may have heard "sun" in the place of "earth" because it's such an obvious answer. In this case the person is more guilty of making an error in hearing, rather an error in knowledge.



      Someone earlier mentioned
    • bluemansteele, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Kinsey, for one you are Canadian... and Canada has some pretty smart people. Also Canadians do things for smart reasons, like milk in bags, and not just for how things "look" like yellow dyed margarine in America. You also seem to be able to type and use the computer, making you, again, smarter than most. I'm going to bet that you also have smart friends because the dumb ones who forget to call you leave behind. So you have too much smartness around you to see this problem. If you picked 5 RANDOM people I promise you one of them will think the Sun goes around the Earth because that is what it "looks" like it does even if they where told differently in school.

      But then again, bovox may be onto something and it's really just people not reading. Still just as dumb.
  • wayback09, on 10/11/2007, -34/+95Did I miss something in that blogspam? Oh that is right, another made up survey with no factual basis to back this claim up.
    Is this one of those surveys that they surveyed ten mentally retarded second graders and two out of ten said this? Buried for just plain stupid.
    • crawf061, on 10/11/2007, -6/+29FTA ---"One adult American in five thinks the Sun revolves around the Earth, an idea science had abandoned by the 17th century." Said Jon D. Miller, a political scientists who directs the Center for Biomedical Communications at the Northwestern University Medical School in Chicago, he regularly surveys Americans for his clients which include the National Science Foundation on the public’s knowledge and attitudes towards science in general.

      There is the source... for what it's worth.
    • Zephkiel, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/science/30profile.html?ex=1183780800&en=e3760aa7d1b5022a&ei=5070

      A Google search for "Jon D Miller 1 in 5" brought this article up. From it:

      Over the last three decades, Dr. Miller has regularly surveyed his fellow citizens for clients as diverse as the National Science Foundation, European government agencies and the Lance Armstrong Foundation. People who track Americans' attitudes toward science routinely cite his deep knowledge and long track record.
      • bovox, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1That NY Times link is not a link to the paper. It is a link to more unfounded, secondhand, undocumented statistics.
    • catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4Ok guys, this is just common sense. Walk outside and ask 10 people if they think the earth revolves around the sun or vice versa. Clearly, if there even was a study done and the guy isn't just exaggerating, the statistics were skewed.
      • RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4That's not a good way to get a fair sampling.
      • resplence, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5The guy who conducted this survey "regularly surveys Americans for his clients which include the National Science Foundation". Perhaps you could offer them your services; I'm sure your sample of 10 subjects picked at random at the vicinity of your home address holds the same statistical relevance as that of professional statisticians.
    • fuelcell, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6How is this blogspam, *****? Is it simply because you see a blog at the end of the link? The article is original and the above replies refute the remainder of your comments.
      • wayback09, on 10/11/2007, -8/+0Eat my ***** and suck my balls.
        The above refutes nothing. The article can not be proven 100% accurate, bitchnugget. Better luck next time.
        • lynx77, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1i think its you that needs the luck, bitchnugget. Crossing the road must be a real struggle for you.
  • jmpeagle, on 10/11/2007, -5/+337"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
    -Winston Churchill
    • Tippis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+40"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
      -Dito
    • MasterThief117, on 10/11/2007, -2/+45Just like going to court.
      Next time you are in front of a jury, just remember, those are the 12 people who were not smart enough to get out of jury duty.
    • NonZionist, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6http://www.eightballmagazine.com/diatribes/volume02/034/708.htm
      +(
      1 in 5 Americans believe Sun revolves around the Earth
      Nkrumah Steward / 06 Apr 2007

      For the democratic process to run properly it necessitates the voter to have some knowledge of what he is voting on.

      For it to work properly it requires voters to cast their votes based on an educated opinion.
      ....
      )+

      .

      +(
      If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.
      )+
      -- Jefferson, letter to Colonel Charles Yancey, 06 Jan 1816

      .

      PURE CHANCE would do a FAR better job of selecting representatives. SERIOUSLY.

      * Chance is incorruptible
      * Chance is unbiased: It automatically generates proportional representation
      * Chance is not blinded by religion or ideology
      * Chance has proven itself in economics and in juror selection

      .

      "Democracy" means "rule by the people". The U.S.I. is so far from being a genuine democracy that it's not even funny. What we have here is rule by the criminal forces that are best able to manipulate and mislead the people.

      The electoral circus is worse than nothing, because it creates the ILLUSION of democracy without the substance. For a system that does provide the substance see:

      http://digg.com/political_opinion/We_Are_the_People?t=7482354#c7482354 -- aleatory democracy
    • mushroomsrmagic, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3The USA is supposed to be a republic, not a democracy. The founding fathers were extremely intent on making sure it would not end up a democracy, which they knew was a step toward totalitarianism. Unfortunately, i think they failed.
      • digudown, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2hows democracy "a step toward totalitarianism"?
        • MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Country slowly slips into becoming a fascist state. Corporate interests run the government, and the only ones with any real power are large commercial entities.

          People usually bawk when the idea that the USA is becoming fascist, but since 2002...

          Govt can arrest anyone and hold them indefinitely without cause.
          Govt can deny right to trial.
          Govt can spy on citizens.
          Govt can torture prisoners.
          Govt can invade other countries unilaterally without approval of international law.
          Govt can choose to withhold information it chooses from the public, far more then it could in the past.

          Same thing happened to the Germans.
        • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Pure democracy, as I've seen it put before, is "two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner." Representative government was designed to both take a burden off the people (making every minute decision) and to allow wiser, cooler heads to make the right decisions. It worked for a while, but too much of the voting populace is stupid.
      • mirunit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What happens is you have wide ranging conflicts of interest, and the conflict reaches a fever pitch - the will of the people breaks and a totalitarian state arises with the promise of ascension from the abyss that the nations has thrown themselves in. Mushroom is correct that democracy can lead to totalitarianism - but macsux is not entirely right on what form of totalitarianism a breakdown will take. The nation that the US is become fascist is a stretch and totally partisan. Also what is International Law? Its a huge conflict of interest, a joke.
      • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Mushroomsrmagic is absolutely correct. Not sure why he's being dugg down, except that diggers are generally knee-jerk ignorant buffoons.
    • dreamstorm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+22Obviously the solution is to add a skill-testing questions to the ballot:

      1. The earth revolves around the sun (true/false)
      2. I vote for president: ________

      If you get the first question wrong, your vote doesn't count!
      • Derrekito, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Question #2

        Evolution is backed by:

        1 belief
        2 evidence
        3 god

        Looks like a liberal is going to be President.
        • sinurgy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Funny until you through in the stupid liberal part!
  • brokenspatula, on 10/11/2007, -29/+12burried as bs
    • TicoTico, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2buried because truth hurts
    • xxx420xxx, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1It's gotta be *****. 300,000,000/5 = 60 mill (rough)

      if you didn't make it to the 3rd grade then maybe you think the Earth revolves around the Sun... other than that, it looks like this Political Science professor is a douche bag stating unsubstantiated *****.
  • OMGWTFROFLMAOx2, on 10/11/2007, -9/+37and then, think about this. Have you ever seen the sun and the moon in the same place at the same time?
    • Zarokima, on 10/11/2007, -0/+43OMG! They're the same person!
    • DeathJux, on 10/11/2007, -3/+30Yep, it's called an eclipse.
      • captainchris, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5not necessarily. it could just be the moon visible in the evening sky.
        • DeathJux, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Notice he said "In the same place, at the same time."
      • AdmiralJimbob, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1I call it mass-media mind-control through subliminal messaging set in motion by the Zionists, personally, but whatever floats your boat.
      • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2That's what I was about to say.
    • TheRingmaster, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18I regularly see the sun and the moon at the same time
    • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -9/+3Ya, hate to burst everyone's bubble here but for the sun and the moon to be in the same place at the same time would mean they are the same object. The world works in 3D remember that.
      • omarciddo, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Sorry, you didn't burst the bubble, but good try though.
      • rabidg00se, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1This isn't the world, this is SPACE.
    • yahoofrom, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4The sun revolves around Earth and Earth revolves around Moon.
    • ElwoodHerring, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0On a cloudless day you can quite often look up and see the moon in the sky at the same time as the sun. The trouble is, most people just don't look.
  • coheedcollapse, on 10/11/2007, -10/+40I find this difficult to believe. Not one person I know personally out of the hundreds and hundreds that I know would believe that the sun revolves around the earth...even the stupid rabidly religious ones. Something has to be up here.
    • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11It really depends on where you are. I live in TX these days and all the people i know from professional relationships know the earth revolves around the sun.

      Then i take a walk into the people my age (21) and ask the same question and honestly some did answer wrong, people i knew when I was growing up, went to the same school as me back in NY. It's scary.
      • TheOther1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Perhaps it's the NY school system...
    • brokencrystal, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Yea, I am "even one of the the stupid rabidly religious ones" and I believe in Science.

      Many scientists are Christians as many Christians are scientists.
      • coheedcollapse, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1There's a difference between stupid rabidly religious and religious. I know we're on digg and all but I won't randomly insult the religious. I don't prescribe to their particular way of living, but I know plenty of them that are quite intelligent.
    • nathanielC, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2My dad believed that. He doesnt believe in science. Or "psychobabble"
      *rolls eyes*
    • DforSpiD, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Religion is rabies?
      Yeah I guess that makes sense
    • FeartheKnighted, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1hey dumb ***** I'm religious AND smarter than you.
      • REBELinBLUE, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4So smart that your only retort was to call someone a dumb *****. Nice going
  • mogus, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5Doesn't it depend on your reference frame? If you take the earth as being stationary, the Sun does exhibit cyclical motion around that center point. Maybe that's not what the 1 in 5 were thinking, though...
    • Jonjonr6, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Interesting thought. In a way, you almost could say the Sun and the planets in the solar system orbit the earth, as well as the rest of the universe.

      Now.. prove me wrong! You can't.
    • mushoo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3What centerpoint are you talking about?

      http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020709.html?
    • wonderchemist, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Still no. If you have the center of earth at the center of your coordinate system. This is what you see.

      Earth spins around on its axis, the sun is located some distance away. As the sun gets farther and near to the earth (during the year), what happens is the sun beings to 'orbit' around a point that is the average distance the earth is from the sun. The actual motion of this orbit, from a looking down on the plane of the earth-sun system, is a figure 8.
    • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4unfortunately saying earth is stationary is as bad as saying the sun revolves around the moon.
    • RobNus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0@wonderchemist: spot on the money, although it took me a while to visualise it :D

      if we are talking absolute motion, then nothing is stationary. its all moving, rotating, revolving, translating, attracting or repelling. Kinda impossible to comprehend with our tiny human brains.
    • weekapaug81, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1wonderfully illustrated.
  • DeathJux, on 10/11/2007, -3/+34Heads up folks, half the population have an IQ of less than 100... somewhere around half the population are dumber than average (and think about your average person)... we live in a world infested with mediocrity.

    The upside is that these people rarely find themselves in positions of power, content to slag on by attending to their own affairs.
    • toph2223, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15then how do we explain away george bush?
      • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2you beat me too it :( :)
      • Oronar, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Bush is an anomaly. The sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the Matrix.
    • FISHMANPET, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17No, they just vote those lucky few into power.
    • Jonjonr6, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16It has electrolites!
    • apiecealarry, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3It's a misnomer to assume that people with IQs below 100 are quintessentially dumb; the IQ test exists to place people in percentiles, therefore the average obviously has to be the middle, meaning that of course half the population is going to be below that. The dynamics and intelligence of people is more complex then a test score.
      • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3incorrect, the average does not have to be the middle it is whatever the average comes out to be, assuming the average would be in the middle actually states the average would be an IQ of 80.
      • Son0fJorel, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I think apiecealarry scored about a 60 on his IQ test and that is what they told him to make him feel better.
    • gpmidi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Isn't 100 the mean IQ instead of the median?
      • dopplerdog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5In the standard Gaussian distribution, the mean is also the median. The bell curve is symmetric.
        • RobNus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0But the IQs off a sample group is not essentially a normal distribution. Therefore, without relying on the Gaussian curve, the average is found to be 100. The median could be 100 as well, but it doesn't really have any bearing on the outcome.
    • ablacksunrise, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2By its very definition half of the population will be dumber than average...
    • jimmiss, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2These people find themselves in positions of power ALL THE TIME!!!
    • lynx77, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Even if we all had IQs of 200 we would still "..live in a world infested with mediocrity." by definition you fool.
    • UncleHumjaba, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Wow... you really are a moron. Half of America is dumber than average? No ***** Sherlock.. The definition of average places exactly half the population dumber and half the population smarter than average...
    • gooniegoogooz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0no Uncle-*****, you're the queertard... what you're describing is called a MEDIAN. An AVERAGE is to add all the values together and divide them by the number of values. 9 People could be at 105 and 1 person at 10 and your average would be 95.5... Get it?
  • friedcalamari, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4Wha'? It does not?
  • superrcat, on 10/11/2007, -5/+32Sources?
    • superrcat, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12Nevermind. I googled the statistics, I was just quite surprised at the aptitude of Americans in general.
  • MrFatalistic, on 10/11/2007, -12/+25Hi political diggers, say hello to my digg filter, you're officially now too biased and retarded for me to have to deal with anymore.
    • mOdQuArK, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Hey, its a win-win decision - you don't have to listen to biased and retarded political discourse, and after you leave the general quality of political discourse will go up!
    • Hobofuzz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Why is it that people seem to think anyone cares that they're being blocked, and even worse, why is it that people feel the need to announce it?
      • bovox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Probably because the people who are being blocked are just attention whores. If you take away their capacity to be attention whores, then you hurt them emotionally and psychologically. They're delicate flowers, you know.

        BTW, I added you to my blocked user list. BUBYE!
    • lynx77, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I must have missed the political content here - but vote Ron Paul!!!

      And you dont need to tell me im blocked, I've already hired the party balloons and booked the DJ.
  • whodatis, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8coming from eightball magazine.....
    • gpmidi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1The magic 8-ball has always known that outlook sucks.
  • TheToecutter, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5Sweeping (but mostly true) generalizations...the guy really should quote sources for those stats, otherwise he comes off sounding like a tool as well.
    • NonZionist, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4He does:

      Source: Scientific Savvy? In U.S., Not Much, New York Times, August 30, 2005


      http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/science/30profile.html?ex=1183780800&en=e3760aa7d1b5022a&ei=5070
      +(
      ....
      Dr. Miller's data reveal some yawning gaps in basic knowledge. American adults in general do not understand what molecules are (other than that they are really small). Fewer than a third can identify DNA as a key to heredity. Only about 10 percent know what radiation is. One adult American in five thinks the Sun revolves around the Earth, an idea science had abandoned by the 17th century.
      ....
      )+

      Next time, pay attention! One of the leading causes of ignorance is laziness.
  • user99923, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3just find out the number of evangelicals in relation to the population and you now know who the one in five are.
  • shablog, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5Wait, it doesn't?
  • knodi, on 10/11/2007, -16/+23buried inaccurate. You would have to be a moron to believe a lot of the ***** on the net.
    • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/science/30profile.html?ex=1183780800&en=e3760aa7d1b5022a&ei=5070

      to bad for you and the rest of us americans it's true.
    • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8BS. I'll have you know that I am currently cooperating with a Nigerian prince in order to help him reclaim his lost fortune. In return, he's promised to grant me a small portion, which is MORE THAN ENOUGH! :D Really, the Internet is not that bad.

      /if you couldn't tell that was sarcasm, you probably believe the sun revolves around the earth
      • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1LOL, point is the NY times article references the same guy as this blog looking article. NY times is also known for a more conservative view and they still admit Americans are dumb. Wonder what the real numbers are.
    • Shadowhawk109, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Oh? How do you figure? All your base DOES belong to us, and crazy backwards stuff DOES go on in Soviet Russia...

      Couldn't resist, mate.
  • Grumbleberries, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Should I let him know you shouldn't end your sentences in prepositions?
  • geekee, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3How many Americans understand that taxing businesses more leads to lower economic growth?
    • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2So you suggest taxing the people more? Our companies have a legal obligation to make the most money for shareholders (if it's a corp) or themselves. If you lower the taxes on a business not a penny of that money will trickle down to the employee or consumer it will just go to their bottom line.

      A true free market would be great except we have this emotion called GREED that destroys the integrity.
      • Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0How about we don't tax anyone more? As for the bottom line, what does those people do with that money? First Diggers bash Americans for not saving their money, then you deny that the money NOT taxed would get put back into the economy? Which is it or do you just botch about everything?
  • blorc, on 10/11/2007, -9/+62http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhlERjW0bhw

    "56% of France thinks the Sun orbits around the Earth"

    Look! I can make grossly unfounded and inaccurate generalizations too!

    Blogspam = Buried.
    • DscHmi3, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1I may be another dumb American, but I'm pretty sure that 20% is a hell of a lot better than 56%. After hours of consideration and intense thought, I have also pushed my moronic American brain to stumble upon the realization that both of the above figures are not at all statistically significant. (thought at least the one bashing the French population has a source cited.)
  • monkeywaffles, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Title has little to nothing to do with article.. lame. looking for a cited reference?

    "Fewer than a third can identify DNA as a key to heredity. " Come on now? This is ridiculous.
    • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2It's all in the presentation of the question. For instance, is the question is "What do you believe is the key to heredity?", many people will not say DNA.
  • bachdog, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1I think a good reason for why this is, is phrases like "sun rise" and "sun set."

    The sun actually it stands still while the earth moves around it. The sun doesn't "rise" but by common sense, it sure appears that way throughout the day
    • Karmavs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2the sun isn't still either…
    • maffiou, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Common acceptation is that the earth revolves around the sun, but it's all a matter of relative movement...
      In all fairness, the sun and the earth are revolving around each other, depending on what you use as a reference... gravitationnal force is symetrical, (each revolving object describe a circle in the other object's referential !!)

      If you want to loose the approximation, the sun and the earth are revolving around a barycenter ponderated by their respective weights (very close to the sun because of the mass difference). But if you're at this level of detail, you should take into consideration the impact of the moon and other elements in the solar system...

      I'd say the question is too vague to draw conclusion on the level of intelligence of the audience... There is the common acceptation on one side and the stupid and clever answer on the other...

      And by the way, that's only a minute detail in the whole article, the catch line for this submission is rubbish !
  • lsatkins, on 10/11/2007, -3/+28I just did a quick survey of 5 people and they all said the Earth revolved around the Sun. I guess that means 100% of Americans believe the Earth revolves around the Sun right?
    • dopplerdog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Your sample is biased. Did you include hillbilly rednecks in your sample? Models? Professional football players? Boxers? Fundamentalists? US Presidents?
  • cr4ft, on 10/11/2007, -12/+41 in 5? So that's about the same amount of people who still support the Bush Administration.

    I wonder if it's the same 1 in 5 who believe the Sun orbits the Earth...
  • kingoftonga, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5Buried because there's absolutely no validity to any of these claims. However, the fact that this article is getting so many diggs might prove his point, ironically enough.
  • zombiedictator, on 10/11/2007, -14/+1190% of statistics are made up on the spot.

    So we have a) an online magazine with zero credibility that I have never heard of b) citing Jon D. Miller, "a political scientists" (pluralizing a single person. Great proof reading!) as their source without any evidence this person exists, let alone said this, and finally c) if this story was true, I don't think it would be relegated to an online blog no one has ever heard about.

    Dugg down for being incorrect.
  • MrHappy123, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3Another idiotic aricle to degrade Americans.. I think we will have to reinvent the Internet again and other important tools that you other "smart" people(people outside America) take for granted each day... oh please stop....
    • Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Mrhappy, you are not allowed to give credit to America for anything unless it is somehow evil. This is Digg. Sorry people, he is just a noob. He doesn;t understand how Digg works yet. Move along.
    • Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Mrhappy, you are not allowed to give credit to America for anything unless it is somehow evil. This is Digg. Sorry people, he is just a noob. He doesn;t understand how Digg works yet. Move along.
    • Zarchon, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Mrhappy, you are not allowed to give credit to America for anything unless it is somehow evil. This is Digg. Sorry people, he is just a noob. He doesn;t understand how Digg works yet. Move along.
  • TheDHC, on 10/11/2007, -12/+7%90 of all statistics are made up on the spot

    welcome to journalism at its worst
  • kibbled, on 10/11/2007, -6/+9There are Lies, Damn Lies and then there are Statistics. I think this 1 in 5 number is a joke.
    • dbutters, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Really, you can make statistics mean whatever you want - it's all in the questions you want. I could ask you, "Do you believe in Intelligent Design, or do you like to eat human babies for breakfast?" and I have a fair idea what most people would answer.
      • mOdQuArK, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Most people would probably answer something like, "You some kinda idiot?!"
      • bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2what's the difference between a pile of pillows and a pile of dead babies? you shouldn't toss a pile of pillows with a pitchfork.
      • RobNus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0You could answer "Neither". Just a thought.
  • MaximusAugustus, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8So not only does this "article" not cite or give the numbers from the supposed survey, their basic generalization about religion misses the mark as well. But as usual on Digg, people believe it. Maybe this author should make some sweeping generalizations about knuckleheads on Digg.

    Awesome. Buried as lame although I can think of several other things to call this "story"
  • getmedia, on 10/11/2007, -4/+37I didn't believe this when I read it - but here's a NY times article that backs it up....

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/science/30profile.html?ex=1183780800&en=e3760aa7d1b5022a&ei=5070
    • crzdmn, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3same here and found a dead link to a government survey in 01' (not surprised that it's a dead link) referenced in 7 different forums/blogs that say 1 in 4 believe this. Went to the site and it no longer allows you to find survey results.

      Just cause i like to throw ***** like this out there http://www.fixedearth.com/ that's where all the believers congregate.

      this is the article i can't get access to anymore (i have seen it before though sometime last year) http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/seind02/append/c7/at07-10.pdf

    • kibbled, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Thank you for the link to the NYT Article. I wish the original blogger linked to this.
    • bovox, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4That article doesn't back anything up. It just regurgitates it -- without sources, proper citations, methodology, sample size, percent error, standard deviation, etc.

      Man, you people believe any statistic thrown at you that agrees with your biased views.
  • valkyries, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6ask people in any country and that stat will probobly hold true.
  • n0t0kayipr0mis3, on 10/11/2007, -7/+6Dugg down as inaccurate.
  • noahhoward, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4I don't recall being surveyed, but I wouldn't be surprise. I wouldn't actually be surprised to find this to be true in other nations too.

    This is what happens when policy makers write policy to protect idiots from themselves, they breed.
  • Mekun, on 10/11/2007, -14/+13Dugg down because digg is full of 12 yr libs who believe crap like this articule.
    • archlich, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6article
      • bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1OMFG! SOMEBODY MADE A TYPO. that's never happened in the history of the internet, and here you come to save the day and correct him!!! way to go!!!
        • RobNus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Is it a typo? or is it just that he doesn't know how to spell "article". Discuss.
    • dbutters, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1I'm new to digg and am just discovering this... I wish they taught logic and philosophy in school.
    • digudown, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4and taught spelling too..
    • javip, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3I don't understand conservatives.. conservatives who believe there's a magical fairy in the sky, a heaven and hell.. some crazy satan dude..
      not only believe this crap, but base their lives on it.. and then casually critisize someone about 'believing' some random statistic

      i mean.. common!!.. logic? common sense? god? heaven? hell? conservative? these are all contradictions!

      ***** idiots
      • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I don't understand liberals.. they want to make everyone gay and grow trees in my house and take away my car and make me eat only veggies while doing a dance to the pagan gods.

        As you can see, generalizations suck.
  • Euler2718, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Don't know how true these are but they're pretty damn funny:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtXCs0Wqs9Q
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LZnIlJP-Js
  • irish, on 10/11/2007, -8/+231 in 5 non-Americans believe anything negative about Americans
    • break99, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5sir, you're wrong: with the police state in the US right now, it's 1 in 5 americans believe they still live in the "land of the free". sorry to break your illusions pal.
      • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11 in 1 Canadian digger above me believes the Alex Jones YouTube videos he watches and doesn't know anything about the real world.
      • MikeWanDo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Didn't you just help to prove irish's point? I mean you're (presumably) a canadian and you clearly hold a negative and stereotypical image of Americans.
    • chessimp, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Only 1 in 5, lol you Americans will believe anything.
    • jimmiss, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Yeah, and 5 in 5 of the rest of the world does too.
      /best grammar ever
      • ryan83189, on 01/26/2008, -0/+1What's wrong with his grammar, despite a missing period?
    • chowgi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Yeah the US is the nation we love to hate.
    • RobNus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0I'd say it's higher than 1 in 5 of non-Americans. With good reason.
  • SOS84, on 10/11/2007, -11/+8Why anybody is surprised by this is beyond me. Just look at the percentage of Americans that support creationism. Heck, a full ten percent of Americans get the majority of their news from talk radio. This from a series of surveys conducted by researcher Andy Leiserowitz. Check out some of his work. It sheds some light on the subject.
    • alok0, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Just reading that article tells so much: Just by assuming that creationists and fundamentalists are uneducated proves his point that America is not smart enough to vote.
    • ryan83189, on 01/26/2008, -0/+1So there are no creationists in other countries? Holding an opinion that doesn't happen to be scientifically correct doesn't make you stupider. I don't agree whole heartedly with evolution, but that does not mean I know nothing about it, and on a survey I would respond that I am a creationist.
  • MasterThief117, on 10/11/2007, -10/+11Wow. I hate living in such a country where people fight to teach ignorance.
    Why did I have to be born here?
    • break99, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9I'm sure people born in china ask the same thing
    • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10You could always move.
    • thegoodsteer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Because your parents know that you masturbate.
    • quik22, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1get the ***** out of my country
      • bluemansteele, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It's not yours quick22 is everyone's
  • maximusGeek, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9The story did not provide any sources for any stats it claimed
    • darconi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Actually it does provide sources if you took the time to read it. Look up at the commenter who posted the link to the NY Times article talking about it.
  • chubbybubba, on 10/11/2007, -11/+7This is complete BS. burried as inaccurate.
    • TicoTico, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Is it inaccurate because it is to low?
  • TheCaterpillar, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12This article is interesting and I totally agree with its message, but I can't believe it states:

    "Fact: Polls show that in general, people who adhere to fundamentalist views are not well educated."

    ...without citing any sort of study or evidence or anything. I'm sorry but in an article arguing for a more informed public, this is unacceptable.
  • sockpuppets, on 10/11/2007, -7/+211 in 5 puppets believe Digg revolves around them.
    • PinkoComrade, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2That digg makes up 80% of the American population, with an error percentage of puppets
  • englishganxta, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Ego-centric...
  • pilot3033, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Just remember "Lies, Damed Lies, and Statistics".
    Who was polled? What question were they asked? Were they asked anything else? Ages? Backgrounds? Education? How many were surveyed? What's the margin of error? Was this question part of a larger survey? How many participants were asked from each State? How many participants were there in the first place? 5? 10? 100? 1,000?
    The education system in this country defiantly needs help, but you can't say the majority are stupid, probably not even 1 in 5. Don't let pop media fool you.
  • kd1s, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2So 20% of Americans are pre-Coppernians. There were other disturbing little tidbits in that article. People didn't know what a molecule was? Hello, a molecule is a very big part of us, and that is H2O.

    They also don't know what radiation is? We're surrounded by it. In essence it's electromagnetic energy.
    • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2It said people don't know what a molecule is, other than that it's really small. That's unsurprising. For the average person with little to no science education, it wold not be easy to define a molecule. How would you define it?
    • ryan83189, on 01/26/2008, -0/+2"Hello, a molecule is a very big part of us, and that is H2O". You do know there is more than one molecule? Right? Maybe I am wrong, with my inferior American education and all.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 254 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.