I would like to comment on some of the issues this blog-post raises: An alternate hypothesis on Americans, Europeans, and evolution – GreyThumb.Blog
Quick summary of the above post:
Americans believe less in evolutionary theory because they are more likely to distrust authorities, and evolutionary theory is disseminated by authorities.
I think I can contribute some insights because while being European I grew up in english/american schools as a kid and I think of myself as a Continental/American-hybrid thinker (sounds scary, huh?).
The United States lags severely in the public acceptance of evolution compared with other industrialized countries. The only country where evolution is accepted less is Turkey.
Turkey is still largely rural, so when you consider thoroughly industrialized countries, America is at the bottom 
.
The usual explanation of this is one of:
* Americans are dumb
* Americans are less educated and more scientifically illiterate
* Americans are more religious
Of those, the last is probably the only one that I accept. Furthermore, I’d like to add another hypothesis to the list. This is just a hypothesis, and I’d be interested to hear what Europeans and others think of it.
I severly reject number one – dumb people can be found everywhere, I don’t think the U.S. have a hegemony in that area.
As for scientific literacy, that’s for empirical studies to decide, but again, differences will probably vary more from urban to rural regions as opposed to Europe vs USA.
As to point three (America is more religious): I do think that this is largely responsible for the difference, and there is no need to look further. Whereas Europe is very skeptical toward religion, due to its history, the founding fathers of the U.S. actually went there to be able to practice their religion. I think that these “memetic” differences still have large effects to this day.
My fourth hypothesis is: Americans trust authorities less.
I suspect that when some smart guy at Oxford tells people that evolution is true, Europeans are more likely to believe it. Americans, on the other hand, suspect a sinister conspiracy anytime somebody in government, academia, or a large corporation opens their mouth. If anything, the fact that information is coming from “accepted authorities” makes it less likely to be believed among a significant cross-section of the American population.
I agree on one point, and severly disagree on another. First: Americans are skeptical toward authority (I agree), and this is indeed a very good thing and we could use more of this kind of thinking here in Europe. BUT (and here I disagree): science in Europe is not viewed as an authority, but instead the church is.
And here indeed we have an eminent difference to the U.S.: in the U.S., science is funded by the military etc, so there is a strong connection to the state, whereas religion is a largely private thing. So Americans who are conspiracy theorists would rather distrust science than religion.
In Europe it’s the other way round: the Roman Catholic church ruled supreme for approx. a 1000 years (500~1500) till during the renaissance independent thinking began. European history since 1500 is about shaking off the influence of the church. Indeed, here in Austria roman catholicism is still a “state religion” with special rights (concordate 1933 between Austria and the Vatican).
What’s more, if you want to stop being a catholic here in Austria you have to go to the local magistrate/government agency (yes, I am talking 2007 C.E. here).
If anything, a conspiracy theorist in Austria would have to be a darwinist, because if there is a conspiring force then it would have to be the church, and definitely not science (if it is irritating for American readers that I talk of “the church”, this is because in Europe we do not have this plethora of christian churches you have in the States).
Science in Europe is viewed as a liberating, emancipating and humanist movement (unfortunately, following an American, trend science is also slowly coming under attack here, but not in the U.S. dimensions).
What I’d like to see is: instead of a poll asking people if they accept evolution, ask people some details that test whether they actually understand it. Ask them things like “did human beings evolve from monkeys?” (Answer: no. We evolved from a common ancestor.) Ask more advanced things like “what is genetic drift?”, “why do we think sex exists?”, “what is a fitness landscape?”, etc.
I suspect you’d see very similar numbers in the industrialized countries for this. The disparity certainly wouldn’t be as huge, and I’d suspect that the U.S. would be at least as high as the middle of the pack.
Very reasonable, and I agree with the conclusion.
The prevalence of skepticism toward authority is one of the things I like most about America.
Three cheers for America, I feel the same way, but I think the younger generation is becoming more critical, so things are changing here 
It is, I think, the reason that America has never succumbed to full-blown fascism despite the proto-fascist philosophical and cultural leanings of a significant section of the population. It’s also surely why America resisted the authoritarian fads of the 20th century that came from the other end of the political spectrum as well.
I’m not so sure that’s the real reason: I think it’s rather the two-party system which guarantees long-term democratic stability (see ie also Switzerland and UK here in Europe).
For a democracy, it is not so much important who rules, but (in addition to human rights and checks and balances in the constitution) that regular change occurs: that no power can entrench itself. The two-party sytem guarantees that, but on the other hand it makes for comfortable majorities.
Evolution just happens to be one case where I have chosen independently to agree with the “authorities.” There are other cases where I don’t. I agree because I understand it, and I’ve seen it actually work in evolutionary computation systems. If I didn’t understand it myself, or if I couldn’t make it work, I’d probably be a doubter regardless of what anyone who claims to be all learn’d and stuff says.
Indeed, and that is what science is about. Authority does not concern us, but truth does. Science is about explanation, unveiling, understanding, about finding out how the world and the universe works. Appealing to authority is a logical fallacy, and not necessary for evolutionary theory (or for any other theory).
If America’s skepticism toward authority means that we have more creationists, I’ll take the creationists over blind acceptance of ideas that come from a central authority.
If the premises were correct, I would agree, but as I wrote above, I do not think that skepticism towards authority entails creationism (because in Europe, as elucidated above, it would rather entail darwinism).
Instead, critical thinking leads to acceptance of the theory of evolution, whereas belief in authority (of elders, parents, tradition, community) – even if only in dialectical opposition to a supposed authority (science in U.S., if this is posited) leads, for instance, to creationsim.
So, what’s the conclusio: everywhere we go, we should engage people in discussions and teach them to think: Sapere aude! Dare to think. Let this clarion call of the Enlightenment age be our guiding light.
