Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Vibrant creationism and pale, male, stale evolution

The convergence of homo sapiens and Mr. Potato Heads has given the information technology industry a reprieve from the media scrutiny it had recently received for being too male, too white, and, if pressed, too Asian.

I'm indefatigably vigilant, however, and I'm not about to allow the icy chauvinists to escape the censure they so sorely deserve. To the contrary, I'm piling on. Not only have they hijacked high tech, it turns out they also predominate when it comes to accepting the theory of evolution as an explanation of the origin of humanity. They're stealing science right out from under the noses of disadvantaged groups like women and NAMs.

The following tables show the percentages of people, first by race and then by sex, who concur with the assertion that "Human beings, as we know them today, evolved from earlier species of animals" (n = 5,238). For contemporary relevance, all responses are from the year 2000 on.

By race:


And by sex:


GSS variables used: RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10)(15-16), SEX(1)(2), EVOLVED, YEAR(2000-2014)


Jokah Macpherson said...

Oh, you know, they're probably just disagreeing on the grounds of "species" being a human construct with no clearly defined biological basis, which therefore nothing could have evolved from.

Ridiculous said...

Evolution by means of natural selection is racist and sexist on the flawed current understanding of the terms, so this is fitting. Atheism is too for that matter. Neither are mentioned though because who? Whom?

Dan said...

New CDC births data came out this week. Whites, blacks and Hispanics each had a 1% increase in number of births over the previous year.

Since whites are older and because of immigration, one would expect that their proportion of births would diminish, all other things being equal. That it is not suggests that the fertility rate of whites is actually increasing relative to the other groups.