What The Public Knows And Does Not Know About Science

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
This Pew Research Center survey provides some insight into the American public’s science knowledge. I am relieved that nobody picked “moon” for that photo of a comet.

On Pew Research Center’s set of 12 multiple-choice questions – some of which include images as part of the questions or answer options – Americans gave more correct than incorrect answers; the median was eight correct answers out of 12 (mean 7.9). Some 27% answered eight or nine questions correctly, while another 26% answered 10 or 11 items correctly. Just 6% of respondents got a perfect score.
 
"How the climate works - 100%" because apparently everyone is a fricking expert when it comes to the climate, including knowing when someone is full of crap :)
 
I answered 11 of the 12 questions correctly, scoring better than 82% of the people who took the original Pew Research Study survey. The only one I missed concerned the temperature at which water boils in two cities of significantly different altitudes.

I'm pleasantly surprised that none of those questions had any evolutionary presuppositions.
 
Well if that wasn't a list from "Are you smarter than a 5th grade?" I don't know what is. What a terrible list of crap that you should be ashamed for not knowing. Barring the water boiling question, which I'll grant people not remembering how elevation affects it that was a stupid batch of questions. Honestly I would of rather seen a test that largely focused on cosmic creation and evolution. Then we would of gotten to see a nice picture on how scientifically illiterate Americans are.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Well if that wasn't a list from "Are you smarter than a 5th grade?" I don't know what is. What a terrible list of crap that you should be ashamed for not knowing. Barring the water boiling question, which I'll grant people not remembering how elevation affects it that was a stupid batch of questions. Honestly I would of rather seen a test that largely focused on cosmic creation and evolution. Then we would of gotten to see a nice picture on how scientifically illiterate Americans are.
Click to expand...

Speaking of illiteracy, "would've" is a contraction of "would have," not "would of."
 
Sort of an interesting survey. I got 12 out of 12 right but I kind of felt like I was taking an 8th grade science test. Most of those questions I learned the answers to in middle school. But science was always my favorite subject.

Still, it is sad to see how poorly we Americans did on this test. In round numbers the average American scored 68 on this test... barely passing. Just sad.
 
I wonder how much of this is how much you know vs how much you remember or if were ever taught it. This difference could skew the data.....if they are even considering the difference. I hope I'm explaining it well. Maybe I'm seeing a distinction they don't care about.

I believe everything there was covered in middle to high school years.....so a lack of science knowledge really would only be represented by those who didn't finish school.

The rest would more than likely be just people who aren't interested in science or don't use it in their fields of work....and just "mind-filed" the info as useless knowledge...up for deletion the next time something more interesting or relevant comes along. they were taught it, so it's not an education issue....more a personal issue.

I personally forgot the water boiling answer because it never impacts my life. I knew it changed though......just forgot which way.
 
Deadly Ramon said:
I answered 11 of the 12 questions correctly, scoring better than 82% of the people who took the original Pew Research Study survey. The only one I missed concerned the temperature at which water boils in two cities of significantly different altitudes.

I'm pleasantly surprised that none of those questions had any evolutionary presuppositions.
Click to expand...

Got them all correct, basic science and info that I learned by middle school I think. There actually is one question on this test has some bearing on evolution, though very indirectly and was the question of what a light year measures.

The speed and nature of light go to the very heart of mainstream science's determination of the size and age of the universe which goes to the heart of evolution. Light coming from sources that are hundreds of thousands of light years away or more from Earth does clash with mainstream Biblical creationism.
 
11/12 (water)
Some of those are just about basic reading comprehension. The answers are in the questions, almost.
 
No one should be 'ashamed' by not knowing this stuff. If it lets them live a fulfilling life and remain content then so be it.
By the grace of god (?) we are a bunch that feels complete only when we acquire new knowledge.
This is not the only path to happiness. But it's a good path.
 
michalrz said:
No one should be 'ashamed' by not knowing this stuff. If it lets them live a fulfilling life and remain content then so be it.
By the grace of god (?) we are a bunch that feels complete only when we acquire new knowledge.
This is not the only path to happiness. But it's a good path.
Click to expand...

I would agree. I was a computing engineering major in college and took lots of math and science throughout my educational career. People with my type of training should know all of this stuff without question.
 
And just to show where the science of the country is at, in an interactive quiz about science a question about what kind of waves do cell phones use, there's the option of radio waves, and light waves. Probably not realizing that radio IS light, so light waves would technically be correct as well.
 
I got 100%, but I had to use deductive analysis, rather than pre-existing specific topical knowledge, to answer a couple of them. Not to be too much of a spoiler... but for the question about magnifying glasses, I thought about a particularly evil off-label use for them. For the question about sound waves, I thought about the names of various pieces of stereo equipment, and what they're used for.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Well if that wasn't a list from "Are you smarter than a 5th grade?" I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

That just goes to show how little most people know about science.

Since I got 12 or of 12 correct, does that mean I'm smarter than a 5th grade :)
 
sfsuphysics said:
And just to show where the science of the country is at, in an interactive quiz about science a question about what kind of waves do cell phones use, there's the option of radio waves, and light waves. Probably not realizing that radio IS light, so light waves would technically be correct as well.
Click to expand...

Actually this did cross my mind as they are both electromagnetic waves. But the difference between light and radio waves is a proper distinction because of difference in their frequencies. I don't propose to get into with a physics guy like you, you probably have forgotten way more than I ever knew about this stuff.
 
sfsuphysics said:
And just to show where the science of the country is at, in an interactive quiz about science a question about what kind of waves do cell phones use, there's the option of radio waves, and light waves. Probably not realizing that radio IS light, so light waves would technically be correct as well.
Click to expand...

"light" is a term we, as humans, use to describe a specific range of electromagnetic waves. If our eyes were tuned to a different frequency, then the term "light" would refer to something different.

Radio Waves could be used as light if you had a receiver tuned to interpret radio waves as light. But you could turn it around and do stuff we do with radio waves with visible light levels. Each would have disadvantages.

EM_spectrum_compare_level1_lg.jpg


In fact Richard Feynman gave a BEAUTIFUL analogy of waves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egB9p5ZbrEg

(Don't let the "tick" fool you, he's brilliant)
 
michalrz said:
No one should be 'ashamed' by not knowing this stuff. If it lets them live a fulfilling life and remain content then so be it.
By the grace of god (?) we are a bunch that feels complete only when we acquire new knowledge.
This is not the only path to happiness. But it's a good path.
Click to expand...

No, this is pretty elementary stuff. Even if you don't remember the exact answer, almost all of them can be figured out with a little deductive reasoning.

waderunner said:
I got 100%, but I had to use deductive analysis, rather than pre-existing specific topical knowledge, to answer a couple of them. Not to be too much of a spoiler... but for the question about magnifying glasses, I thought about a particularly evil off-label use for them. For the question about sound waves, I thought about the names of various pieces of stereo equipment, and what they're used for.
Click to expand...

HAH I'm not the only one who instantly thought of burning totally non living things with a magnifying glass. :p

nutzo said:
That just goes to show how little most people know about science.

Since I got 12 or of 12 correct, does that mean I'm smarter than a 5th grade :)
Click to expand...

Yep, and yes I'm aware of the typo. Hate posting from a phone. On my laptop now, it is so much better. I can multi-quote again!
 
RedWagnum said:
Sort of an interesting survey. I got 12 out of 12 right but I kind of felt like I was taking an 8th grade science test. Most of those questions I learned the answers to in middle school. But science was always my favorite subject.
Click to expand...

Same here. But, take someone with zero interest in science and they won't get as many.

Let's see how people on [H] do on a quiz about pop culture, art, or several other subjects that don't really interest us. I'd think we'd get similar results. A few will ace it, most will do ok, but it'll show a lack of mastery in those subjects. Other people will say you're dumb for not getting a 5th grade level of the subject, but it's just not an interest for us and we'd have no reason to remember or know the material...

People probably learned that at one time or another. They just have no reason to retain that information. It was taught, though, so you can't blame the education system.
 
heatlesssun said:
I would agree. I was a computing engineering major in college and took lots of math and science throughout my educational career. People with my type of training should know all of this stuff without question.
Click to expand...

I never went to a 'real' college. Just a 3.5 year college-like course in IT.
In primary school and secondary I had zero interest in math, logic, programming, chemistry. I studied poetry and prose, enjoyed biology and not much beyond that.

However I did like to tinker. I would copy an Amiga game from one damaged floppy to another and 'zero' unreadable/corrupted sectors by hand in the hope a game would run.

They often did :D
I had no interest in electronics or electricity until I got into messing with audio gear.
When I finally assembled a headphone amplifier (Cmoy) I went through it like a dozen of times to figure out how symmetric power worked, what pull-up/down resistors did.
When I stumbled on a term like 'buffer' enough times it would bug me enough to research output/input impedance.

dakoth-e said:
No, this is pretty elementary stuff. Even if you don't remember the exact answer, almost all of them can be figured out with a little deductive reasoning.
Click to expand...

Elementary for you.
As a kid I pointed at the Hale-Bopp comet and my friends would laugh pretty hard. I was happy I got a chance to see it while they were happy they got a shot at ridiculing me.
Let's look at the quiz again.
Q1/12. Comet? or maybe an ordinary planet with an elliptical orbit emitting steam as it nears its perihelium?
Q 4/12: "Which of these is the main way that ocean tides are created?" - notice the word 'main'? open ended question, no?
Q 8/12: "What determines loudness?" - we choose amplitude but discard psychoacoustic factors and individual sensitivity to particular wavelengths.
 
I doubled guessed myself on a couple questions and got them wrong, when I put the correct answer first. One question I totally did not remember at all.
 
Kor said:
It's settled science, I'm not sure what you're happy about.
Click to expand...

It's certainly settled in mainstream science with a high degree of confidence. But it's still very controversial because of the religious implications. And these religious conflicts extended well beyond evolution and extend into astronomy, cosmology and physics.
 
heatlesssun said:
Just took it, got these all correct as well. Doesn't seem any different to me in difficulty than the one in the OP.
Click to expand...

Did it not strike you how the alternative answers were screaming wrong? like lasers focusing sound?
I got the 'fracking' one wrong because I don't into English, but the water boiling I failed at out of pure ignorance.
 
michalrz said:
Did it not strike you how the alternative answers were screaming wrong? like lasers focusing sound?
I got the 'fracking' one wrong because I don't into English, but the water boiling I failed at out of pure ignorance.
Click to expand...

I see your point. This is just basic science that I've known for a long time so I just knew the answers. Not bragging or anything, this is just stuff I should know because of my education.
 
And thus you clouded your point a bit.
You mentioned employing primary school knowledge to solve the first quiz and later referenced higher education.
So which in your opinion helped you deal with that quiz?

heatlesssun said:
I see your point. This is just basic science that I've known for a long time so I just knew the answers. Not bragging or anything, this is just stuff I should know because of my education.
Click to expand...
 
11/12, astronomy astrology mixed up =/

dropped out of college freshman year, but definitely favored tech/science growing up
 
michalrz said:
And thus you clouded your point a bit.
You mentioned employing primary school knowledge to solve the first quiz and later referenced higher education.
So which in your opinion helped you deal with that quiz?
Click to expand...

I knew all this stuff before going to college and I can't recall exactly when I knew all of this stuff but certainly by the 8th grade I would have known most it. I read lots science books when I was a kid, kind of geek but then slacked way off as started getting into computers. My point was simply I don't know how anyone with as much math and science as I've had wouldn't know all of this stuff just was well.
 
nowwhatnapster said:
11/12, astronomy astrology mixed up =/

dropped out of college freshman year, but definitely favored tech/science growing up
Click to expand...

Really don't know a lot about astrology but knew a lady that owned a book store growing up who was an expert. She did chart for me and it was pretty cool. Really had no idea what it meant but the process was definitely interesting.
 
Kor said:
It's settled science
Click to expand...

"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had."--Michael Crichton
 
heatlesssun said:
There actually is one question on this test has some bearing on evolution, though very indirectly and was the question of what a light year measures.

The speed and nature of light go to the very heart of mainstream science's determination of the size and age of the universe which goes to the heart of evolution. Light coming from sources that are hundreds of thousands of light years away or more from Earth does clash with mainstream Biblical creationism.
Click to expand...

As the relevant survey question correctly implied, a light-year is a measure of distance, not time. Bible-believing scientists reject any attempts by evolutionary acolytes (or science-by-consensus advocates) to make of a light-year anything more than that, and have several theories that account for the existence of distant starlight:

"Distant starlight and the biblical timescale

We now have the keys to understanding how starlight can reach us from such vast distances in just a few thousand years of Earth time. The days of the Creation Week were recorded from the point of view of an observer on the earth so the time reference in Genesis is Earth time. On Day 4, as God commenced stretching out the heavens, the mass of the universe (presumably including the ‘waters above’ which were separated out on Day 2) would have been confined to a much smaller volume of space than is the case today. Assuming the Hartnett–Carmeli theory is correct, the Universe rapidly expanded with massive time dilation as a result of very rapid acceleration of the fabric of space on Day 4. The Humphreys model on the other hand, also based on General Relativity, has clocks at the outer edge of the cosmos running much faster than earth-bound clocks because of gravitational time dilation."
 
Deadly Ramon said:
As the relevant survey question correctly implied, a light-year is a measure of distance, not time. Bible-believing scientists reject any attempts by evolutionary acolytes (or science-by-consensus advocates) to make of a light-year anything more than that, and have several theories that account for the existence of distant starlight:

"Distant starlight and the biblical timescale

We now have the keys to understanding how starlight can reach us from such vast distances in just a few thousand years of Earth time. The days of the Creation Week were recorded from the point of view of an observer on the earth so the time reference in Genesis is Earth time. On Day 4, as God commenced stretching out the heavens, the mass of the universe (presumably including the ‘waters above’ which were separated out on Day 2) would have been confined to a much smaller volume of space than is the case today. Assuming the Hartnett–Carmeli theory is correct, the Universe rapidly expanded with massive time dilation as a result of very rapid acceleration of the fabric of space on Day 4. The Humphreys model on the other hand, also based on General Relativity, has clocks at the outer edge of the cosmos running much faster than earth-bound clocks because of gravitational time dilation."
Click to expand...

All I was saying out is exactly what you're pointing out here. There is some controversy attached to the concept of a light year to creationists. Because the speed of light over time, which is what a light year is, goes to the heart of how mainstream science has determined the age of the universe.
 
Deadly Ramon said:
"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had."--Michael Crichton
Click to expand...

Was this from State Of Fear? Fantastic book.
 
westrock2000 said:
Was this from State Of Fear? Fantastic book.
Click to expand...

The website in the link embedded in the quotation attributes it to a speech Michael made at the California Institute of Technology in January 2003. He made similar statements in the afterword and appendices to State of Fear, published in December 2004.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top