7 ms·

What Americans Don't Know About Science

11 points by ghosh 13y ago

mcv 13y ago
So apparently, a quarter of Americans gets "Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth?" wrong. Imagine my surprise that of EU citizens, a third got the question wrong! We score lower than India and Malaysia, which scored significantly lower at the earlier questions. I'm totally baffled about how so many people from well-educated nations with space programs can get this wrong.
- venomsnake 13y ago
  Well - I had a friend of mine that didn't knew who Cardinal Richelieu was - and he had two masters degrees with flying colors. So he never bothered to remember the history lessons thought at school (the Cardinal was somewhat influential figure during the uneventful times known as the 30 year war that shaped modern Europe and set in motion the processes that culminated in WWII) and never even watched or read the Three Musketeers. Sometimes ignorance could be found in the most surprising places.
  - nmc 13y ago
    "the Cardinal was somewhat influential figure during the uneventful times known as the 30 year war that shaped modern Europe and set in motion the processes that culminated in WWII" I am going to take this point by point. - Cardinal Richelieu was extremely influential: he was the "Prime Minister" of Louis XIII, King of France, for 18 years, and he had a drastic impact on his time. - The Thirty Years' War was not "uneventful". Millions of people were slaughtered, notably about 60% of the population of Central Europe. - The first half of the 17th century changed the shape of Europe: absolutism won over feudalism, while catholics massacred a great deal of protestants in Western Europe, almost destroying the Holy Romano-German Empire en passant. But the shape of Europe changed again after that. Your reference to WWII is so far-fetched that I will wait for you to provide me with a reference before I start arguing against it.
    - blumkvist 13y ago
      You appear to be so eager to show off with your knowledge that you fail to see obvious irony.
      - nmc 13y ago
        Irony is a lot less obvious in written form. Also, I am not American, so I fell into the trap, thinking Richelieu was actually "supposed to be known" by the average American. Retrospectively, I see it know.
    - pawn 13y ago
      I'm pretty sure the parent commenter knew that, and was speaking in under-statements on purpose...
      - nmc 13y ago
        My mistake then.
    - venomsnake 13y ago
      Richelieu introduced the concept of raison d'etat which elevated the nation and national interests above that of the church (he was supporting protestant rebels against the catholic aligned rulers to avoid encirclement of france by the Hapsburgs) The 30 year war lead to fragmented germany kept this way for two centuries, dominant france up to the Napoleonic wars. The dominant france lead to the whole balance of power concept that GB tried its best to upheld up to the 1940s. The fragmented Germany was natural battleground for the bloodiest conflicts on the continent since which lead to the ingrained desire for strength power and security above all. Germany never had the chance to mature out of it as a country after the unification - Bismarck left it with too much power for the leaders to absorb and control which led to WWI - it was the braking down of the balance of power order. And WWII was just extension of WWI mainly because of the idiotic treaty of Versailles that did squat to reconcile overpowered germany with the rest of the continent and the inability of USA to contain the great depression.
      - 13y ago
nmc 13y ago
"Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth?" Fortunately, Americans are not stupid. They know that "A goes around B" and "B goes around A" are equivalent because there is no real Galilean reference frame. The Earth goes around the sun from the Sun's perspective. Considering this is true means the Sun has a fixed position. This holds for the Solar System — by definition, the Sun is fixed at the center. Moreover, there is a lot of other stuff going around the Sun — while the Earth only has the Moon and a bunch of metal boxes. Concerning the Universe, neither the Sun nor Earth are fixed. Depending on the reference frame, one is going around the other, and vice-versa. So both "true" and "false" are correct answers.
- DanBC 13y ago
  How many of that quarter do you think have this kind of understanding of the question and answered the way they did? How many do you think have some other understanding of the question? ('The sun rises and sets, so it is the sun that is moving') (I'm avoiding the tedious hurr durr amuricuns is dumb stuff because the results for Europe are similar.)
  - nmc 13y ago
    I totally agree with you; my comment was intended as a joke. I also wanted to point out that "not knowing about science" cannot be brought down to a handful of True/False questions.
- palmtree3000 13y ago
  I'm probably taking your comment far too seriously, but.... The Sun's reference frame is privileged compared to ours: it is far closer to being an inertial reference frame[0], deviating from wobble induced by Jupiter and its long orbit around the galactic core. (This is from a purely Newtonian perspective: both would be considered inertial in GR.) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_reference_frame https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_reference_frame
  - nmc 13y ago
    I think you mean "both would not be considered inertial in GR". An inertial frame of reference suggests the existence of a homogeneous, isotropic region of space; in general relativity, gravitation shapes space and, since gravitation has infinite range, such a region does not exist. The closest relativistic thing would be a reference frame free-falling inside a gravitational field: it is locally inertial. So yes, the Sun is more inertial than Earth, but neither are a real inertial reference frame — because such a thing cannot exist. In Newtonian perspective, they can both be considered inertial — but you will also need to pick three stars far enough so they seem immobile.
DanBC 13y ago
I can't quite understand what model people have if they think the sun goes around the Earth. It's a bit like the people who don't understand the miles per hour thing ("a car is travelling at 60 miles per hour. How long will it take to drive 60 miles?")
- conradfr 13y ago
  We had this contestant in "Who wants to be a millionaire" in France : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmLwnSXNpFU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmLwnSXNpFU Facepalm with the audience results.
001sky 13y ago
The existence of a left hand tail is not evidence that a distribution is skewed. Americans may be answering not based on knowledge, but on belief. As shown above, only 48 percent of Americans responded "true" to the statement "Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals." But if the question was reframed slightly, far more people responded with "true." Given the statement "according to the theory of evolution, human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals," 72 percent answered "true." (Emphasis mine.) A similar pattern happens with the Big Bang question. When the statement is simply "The universe began with a huge explosion," 39 percent responded "true." When it is "according to astronomers, the universe began with a huge explosion," 60 percent said "true." This seems to indicate that many Americans are familiar with the theories of evolution and the Big Bang; they simply don't believe they're true. To wit, people don't believe everything they read.
- nmc 13y ago
  Yes, they do. Just looks like The Bible is more trustworthy than On the Origin of Species.
  - 001sky 13y ago
    It demonstrates a huge lack of judgement to assume you understand how other people think from telephone survey. http://www.gallup.com/poll/147824/adults-estimate-americans-gay-lesbian.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/147824/adults-estimate-americans-... http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/who-responds-to-telephone-polls-anymore-20120719 http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/who-responds-to-tele... http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2014/01/young-pranksters-skewed-landmark-sexuality-study http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2014/01/young-pranksters... TLDR: It's not unknown for people to answer these things like Bart Simpson, and sniggering in the background.
    - nmc 13y ago
      Disclaimer: That comment was a joke. I do not pretend to understand anyone's way of thinking. Thank you for clarifying.
sentenza 13y ago
What I find more shocking is that the EU number is even lower than that. I would very much like to see this divided up by EU countries because I seriously don't understand what is going on here. This is what I would personally expect from a survey here in Germany: Answers shaped by "worst-case" assumptions and disdain towards nuclear power, genetic engineering and possibly some misinformation regarding vaccinations and homeopathy. With the "Is all radioactivity man-made" question, for instance, I would expect sub-par performance of my fellow countrymen. But the Earth moving around the sun??? I mean even if somebody were to get all their information from watching television over here, they would know _that_.
- blumkvist 13y ago
  I'm highly skeptical of the results in this poll.
- AdamN 13y ago
  Yeah, and what's up with Japan
billyjobob 13y ago
His ignorance was as remarkable as his knowledge. Of contemporary literature, philosophy and politics he appeared to know next to nothing. Upon my quoting Thomas Carlyle, he inquired in the naivest way who he might be and what he had done. My surprise reached a climax, however, when I found incidentally that he was ignorant of the Copernican Theory and of the composition of the Solar System. That any civilized human being in this nineteenth century should not be aware that the earth travelled round the sun appeared to be to me such an extraordinary fact that I could hardly realize it. "You appear to be astonished," he said, smiling at my expression of surprise. "Now that I do know it I shall do my best to forget it." "To forget it!" "You see," he explained, "I consider that a man's brain originally is like a little empty attic, and you have to stock it with such furniture as you choose. A fool takes in all the lumber of every sort that he comes across, so that the knowledge which might be useful to him gets crowded out, or at best is jumbled up with a lot of other things so that he has a difficulty in laying his hands upon it. Now the skilful workman is very careful indeed as to what he takes into his brain-attic. He will have nothing but the tools which may help him in doing his work, but of these he has a large assortment, and all in the most perfect order. It is a mistake to think that that little room has elastic walls and can distend to any extent. Depend upon it there comes a time when for every addition of knowledge you forget something that you knew before. It is of the highest importance, therefore, not to have useless facts elbowing out the useful ones." "But the Solar System!" I protested. "What the deuce is it to me?" he interrupted impatiently; "you say that we go round the sun. If we went round the moon it would not make a pennyworth of difference to me or to my work."
- andyjohnson0 13y ago
  I'm not sure why this unattributed. The passage is from A Study in Scarlet, by Arthur Conan Doyle.
  - Delmania 13y ago
    Also, this is when Watson first meets Holmes.
- delluminatus 13y ago
Robin_Message 13y ago
A poll like this should ask the questions both ways around (and/or with multiple phrasings), so you can distinguish guessing (which should come out at 50% correct if the question is not biasing people and no-one knows the right answer) vs incorrect knowledge (which will come out <50% whatever the phrasing).
AdamN 13y ago
We should remember though that the earth does not revolve around the sun. They revolve around each other in an ellipse. Practically speaking, the ellipse heavily 'favors' the sun such that it doesn't move much ... but it does in fact move in response to the earth's gravitational pull.
jotm 13y ago
I just want to double facepalm, then bang my head against a wall whenever someone recommends taking antibiotics against the flu or the common cold, as I've given up trying to explain why it doesn't work (viruses are basically bacteria, right?)
- tripzilch 13y ago
  Viruses are smaller than bacteria, so obviously you need more antibiotics to hit them all.
- JetSpiegel 13y ago
  What are these "bacteria" you speak of? Aren't antibiotics a panacea? When you are sick you just take them and they magically make you better. If you have a flu and doctors don't give you antibiotics, they are trying to kill you!
lucashn 13y ago
I don't thing that those are the right questions to ask. Most of then expects a 'simplified' answer, like the earth revolving the sun and the Big Bang being an 'explosion'.
yoha 13y ago
Seriously, lots of these questions are ambiguous to educated people: > The center of the earth is very hot Not it's not. Stars are way hotter. > Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth? Yes. Both? Neither? Depends on which point of view is the most useful. > The universe began with a huge explosion No. It did not. The universe expanded. It is a huge difference. > It is the father’s gene that decides whether the baby is a boy or a girl What is "this gene" you're talking about? Are you sure you now the difference between a gene and chromosome? > Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals This is way more ambiguous that you may think: from this statement, you could infer the theory evolution or something totally stupid. Additionally, other questions are just made to be answered wrong for common people. > The continents have been moving their location for millions of years and will continue to move The question is long, there must be a trick somewhere, I'll answer no just in case. > All radioactivity is man-made I have heard that bananas were radioactive too, but I guess that's not so important so this is not what this question is about, right? > Electrons are smaller than atoms Err… whatever, I'll just guess. > Lasers work by focusing sound waves Lasers is dangerous light. I don't know how they are made though and this explanation sounds sciency, why not? And just as a bonus: > Antibiotics kill viruses as well as bacteria You do know that viruses are not commonly considered as living beings, right? Using "kill" make it so that you don't know what the question is about anymore. tl;dr: these questions were just selected to trick people into answering wrong, I would say they were other questions whose results shown opposite trends (due to randomness), but were not disruptive anough for the article

11 points by ghosh 13y ago

mcv 13y ago

So apparently, a quarter of Americans gets "Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth?" wrong. Imagine my surprise that of EU citizens, a third got the question wrong! We score lower than India and Malaysia, which scored significantly lower at the earlier questions. I'm totally baffled about how so many people from well-educated nations with space programs can get this wrong.

venomsnake 13y ago
Well - I had a friend of mine that didn't knew who Cardinal Richelieu was - and he had two masters degrees with flying colors. So he never bothered to remember the history lessons thought at school (the Cardinal was somewhat influential figure during the uneventful times known as the 30 year war that shaped modern Europe and set in motion the processes that culminated in WWII) and never even watched or read the Three Musketeers. Sometimes ignorance could be found in the most surprising places.
- nmc 13y ago
  "the Cardinal was somewhat influential figure during the uneventful times known as the 30 year war that shaped modern Europe and set in motion the processes that culminated in WWII" I am going to take this point by point. - Cardinal Richelieu was extremely influential: he was the "Prime Minister" of Louis XIII, King of France, for 18 years, and he had a drastic impact on his time. - The Thirty Years' War was not "uneventful". Millions of people were slaughtered, notably about 60% of the population of Central Europe. - The first half of the 17th century changed the shape of Europe: absolutism won over feudalism, while catholics massacred a great deal of protestants in Western Europe, almost destroying the Holy Romano-German Empire en passant. But the shape of Europe changed again after that. Your reference to WWII is so far-fetched that I will wait for you to provide me with a reference before I start arguing against it.
  - blumkvist 13y ago
    You appear to be so eager to show off with your knowledge that you fail to see obvious irony.
    - nmc 13y ago
      Irony is a lot less obvious in written form. Also, I am not American, so I fell into the trap, thinking Richelieu was actually "supposed to be known" by the average American. Retrospectively, I see it know.
  - pawn 13y ago
    I'm pretty sure the parent commenter knew that, and was speaking in under-statements on purpose...
    - nmc 13y ago
      My mistake then.
  - venomsnake 13y ago
    Richelieu introduced the concept of raison d'etat which elevated the nation and national interests above that of the church (he was supporting protestant rebels against the catholic aligned rulers to avoid encirclement of france by the Hapsburgs) The 30 year war lead to fragmented germany kept this way for two centuries, dominant france up to the Napoleonic wars. The dominant france lead to the whole balance of power concept that GB tried its best to upheld up to the 1940s. The fragmented Germany was natural battleground for the bloodiest conflicts on the continent since which lead to the ingrained desire for strength power and security above all. Germany never had the chance to mature out of it as a country after the unification - Bismarck left it with too much power for the leaders to absorb and control which led to WWI - it was the braking down of the balance of power order. And WWII was just extension of WWI mainly because of the idiotic treaty of Versailles that did squat to reconcile overpowered germany with the rest of the continent and the inability of USA to contain the great depression.
    - 13y ago

nmc 13y ago

"Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth?" Fortunately, Americans are not stupid. They know that "A goes around B" and "B goes around A" are equivalent because there is no real Galilean reference frame. The Earth goes around the sun from the Sun's perspective. Considering this is true means the Sun has a fixed position. This holds for the Solar System — by definition, the Sun is fixed at the center. Moreover, there is a lot of other stuff going around the Sun — while the Earth only has the Moon and a bunch of metal boxes. Concerning the Universe, neither the Sun nor Earth are fixed. Depending on the reference frame, one is going around the other, and vice-versa. So both "true" and "false" are correct answers.

DanBC 13y ago
How many of that quarter do you think have this kind of understanding of the question and answered the way they did? How many do you think have some other understanding of the question? ('The sun rises and sets, so it is the sun that is moving') (I'm avoiding the tedious hurr durr amuricuns is dumb stuff because the results for Europe are similar.)
- nmc 13y ago
  I totally agree with you; my comment was intended as a joke. I also wanted to point out that "not knowing about science" cannot be brought down to a handful of True/False questions.
palmtree3000 13y ago
I'm probably taking your comment far too seriously, but.... The Sun's reference frame is privileged compared to ours: it is far closer to being an inertial reference frame[0], deviating from wobble induced by Jupiter and its long orbit around the galactic core. (This is from a purely Newtonian perspective: both would be considered inertial in GR.) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_reference_frame https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_reference_frame
- nmc 13y ago
  I think you mean "both would not be considered inertial in GR". An inertial frame of reference suggests the existence of a homogeneous, isotropic region of space; in general relativity, gravitation shapes space and, since gravitation has infinite range, such a region does not exist. The closest relativistic thing would be a reference frame free-falling inside a gravitational field: it is locally inertial. So yes, the Sun is more inertial than Earth, but neither are a real inertial reference frame — because such a thing cannot exist. In Newtonian perspective, they can both be considered inertial — but you will also need to pick three stars far enough so they seem immobile.

DanBC 13y ago

I can't quite understand what model people have if they think the sun goes around the Earth. It's a bit like the people who don't understand the miles per hour thing ("a car is travelling at 60 miles per hour. How long will it take to drive 60 miles?")

conradfr 13y ago
We had this contestant in "Who wants to be a millionaire" in France : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmLwnSXNpFU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmLwnSXNpFU Facepalm with the audience results.

001sky 13y ago

The existence of a left hand tail is not evidence that a distribution is skewed. Americans may be answering not based on knowledge, but on belief. As shown above, only 48 percent of Americans responded "true" to the statement "Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals." But if the question was reframed slightly, far more people responded with "true." Given the statement "according to the theory of evolution, human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals," 72 percent answered "true." (Emphasis mine.) A similar pattern happens with the Big Bang question. When the statement is simply "The universe began with a huge explosion," 39 percent responded "true." When it is "according to astronomers, the universe began with a huge explosion," 60 percent said "true." This seems to indicate that many Americans are familiar with the theories of evolution and the Big Bang; they simply don't believe they're true. To wit, people don't believe everything they read.

nmc 13y ago
Yes, they do. Just looks like The Bible is more trustworthy than On the Origin of Species.
- 001sky 13y ago
  It demonstrates a huge lack of judgement to assume you understand how other people think from telephone survey. http://www.gallup.com/poll/147824/adults-estimate-americans-gay-lesbian.aspx http://www.gallup.com/poll/147824/adults-estimate-americans-... http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/who-responds-to-telephone-polls-anymore-20120719 http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/who-responds-to-tele... http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2014/01/young-pranksters-skewed-landmark-sexuality-study http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2014/01/young-pranksters... TLDR: It's not unknown for people to answer these things like Bart Simpson, and sniggering in the background.
  - nmc 13y ago
    Disclaimer: That comment was a joke. I do not pretend to understand anyone's way of thinking. Thank you for clarifying.

sentenza 13y ago

What I find more shocking is that the EU number is even lower than that. I would very much like to see this divided up by EU countries because I seriously don't understand what is going on here. This is what I would personally expect from a survey here in Germany: Answers shaped by "worst-case" assumptions and disdain towards nuclear power, genetic engineering and possibly some misinformation regarding vaccinations and homeopathy. With the "Is all radioactivity man-made" question, for instance, I would expect sub-par performance of my fellow countrymen. But the Earth moving around the sun??? I mean even if somebody were to get all their information from watching television over here, they would know _that_.

blumkvist 13y ago
I'm highly skeptical of the results in this poll.
AdamN 13y ago
Yeah, and what's up with Japan

billyjobob 13y ago

His ignorance was as remarkable as his knowledge. Of contemporary literature, philosophy and politics he appeared to know next to nothing. Upon my quoting Thomas Carlyle, he inquired in the naivest way who he might be and what he had done. My surprise reached a climax, however, when I found incidentally that he was ignorant of the Copernican Theory and of the composition of the Solar System. That any civilized human being in this nineteenth century should not be aware that the earth travelled round the sun appeared to be to me such an extraordinary fact that I could hardly realize it. "You appear to be astonished," he said, smiling at my expression of surprise. "Now that I do know it I shall do my best to forget it." "To forget it!" "You see," he explained, "I consider that a man's brain originally is like a little empty attic, and you have to stock it with such furniture as you choose. A fool takes in all the lumber of every sort that he comes across, so that the knowledge which might be useful to him gets crowded out, or at best is jumbled up with a lot of other things so that he has a difficulty in laying his hands upon it. Now the skilful workman is very careful indeed as to what he takes into his brain-attic. He will have nothing but the tools which may help him in doing his work, but of these he has a large assortment, and all in the most perfect order. It is a mistake to think that that little room has elastic walls and can distend to any extent. Depend upon it there comes a time when for every addition of knowledge you forget something that you knew before. It is of the highest importance, therefore, not to have useless facts elbowing out the useful ones." "But the Solar System!" I protested. "What the deuce is it to me?" he interrupted impatiently; "you say that we go round the sun. If we went round the moon it would not make a pennyworth of difference to me or to my work."

andyjohnson0 13y ago
I'm not sure why this unattributed. The passage is from A Study in Scarlet, by Arthur Conan Doyle.
- Delmania 13y ago
  Also, this is when Watson first meets Holmes.
delluminatus 13y ago

Robin_Message 13y ago

A poll like this should ask the questions both ways around (and/or with multiple phrasings), so you can distinguish guessing (which should come out at 50% correct if the question is not biasing people and no-one knows the right answer) vs incorrect knowledge (which will come out <50% whatever the phrasing).

AdamN 13y ago

We should remember though that the earth does not revolve around the sun. They revolve around each other in an ellipse. Practically speaking, the ellipse heavily 'favors' the sun such that it doesn't move much ... but it does in fact move in response to the earth's gravitational pull.

jotm 13y ago

I just want to double facepalm, then bang my head against a wall whenever someone recommends taking antibiotics against the flu or the common cold, as I've given up trying to explain why it doesn't work (viruses are basically bacteria, right?)

tripzilch 13y ago
Viruses are smaller than bacteria, so obviously you need more antibiotics to hit them all.
JetSpiegel 13y ago
What are these "bacteria" you speak of? Aren't antibiotics a panacea? When you are sick you just take them and they magically make you better. If you have a flu and doctors don't give you antibiotics, they are trying to kill you!

lucashn 13y ago

I don't thing that those are the right questions to ask. Most of then expects a 'simplified' answer, like the earth revolving the sun and the Big Bang being an 'explosion'.

yoha 13y ago

Seriously, lots of these questions are ambiguous to educated people: > The center of the earth is very hot Not it's not. Stars are way hotter. > Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth? Yes. Both? Neither? Depends on which point of view is the most useful. > The universe began with a huge explosion No. It did not. The universe expanded. It is a huge difference. > It is the father’s gene that decides whether the baby is a boy or a girl What is "this gene" you're talking about? Are you sure you now the difference between a gene and chromosome? > Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals This is way more ambiguous that you may think: from this statement, you could infer the theory evolution or something totally stupid. Additionally, other questions are just made to be answered wrong for common people. > The continents have been moving their location for millions of years and will continue to move The question is long, there must be a trick somewhere, I'll answer no just in case. > All radioactivity is man-made I have heard that bananas were radioactive too, but I guess that's not so important so this is not what this question is about, right? > Electrons are smaller than atoms Err… whatever, I'll just guess. > Lasers work by focusing sound waves Lasers is dangerous light. I don't know how they are made though and this explanation sounds sciency, why not? And just as a bonus: > Antibiotics kill viruses as well as bacteria You do know that viruses are not commonly considered as living beings, right? Using "kill" make it so that you don't know what the question is about anymore. tl;dr: these questions were just selected to trick people into answering wrong, I would say they were other questions whose results shown opposite trends (due to randomness), but were not disruptive anough for the article