With the overwhelming body of evidence for both evolution and climate change, why do you still not believe that both are true?
What then does it take for you to believe in a scientific theory? We all know that Romney and Santorum will tell you that they do believe in some scientific theories. So we need to know which ones, and why they do believe in them.
Robert Keefe commented
Maybe it would be helpful to point out to political candidates that all scientific theories are arrived at using the same fundamental process - no exceptions! Scientists don't use one process to come up with a description of how new species originate, and another to describe the atomic nature of matter, or the force of gravity. Scientific theories can, and sometimes do, change over time. But only with the acquisition of new data obtained using the scientific method which is published and universally accepted by peers. Finally, one should never phrase this question as "do you believe....". Evolution is not a belief (like a religion is). It's an explanation based upon facts & years of collected knowledge obtained by science practitioners.
Ronald Havelock commented
There is no real consensus on climate change and what causes it. Properly assembled evidence is the only rule to follow here. My liberal friends have been misled by environmental fanatics masquerading as scientists. I am a strong supporter of Barack Obama, but I am hotly opposed to Al Gore and his scare-mongering on climate. Global temperatures have been flat for 15 years. Furthermore, evolution and climate change are two entirely different topics. Those who framed this question slanted it to commit respondent to green ideology.
Far too aggressive.
I agree with John and Dave here - this is an accusation with a question mark at the end. I like John's version instead.
This question has an accusatory tone and makes many assumptions. Much better would be two questions asking what their views are on evolution and climate change.
John's rewording of the question seems to get to the heart of the matter in a respectful way. If the amended wording is acceptable to Joe, it's got my vote.
John Menninger commented
A direct question is likely to be evaded, if not ignored. Perhaps a less direct version: Why do you think in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence that so many people doubt evolution and climate change? How can this issue be resolved politically?
This entry actually has TWO questions, which I think is a mismatch for the purpose of this poll.
These two questions seem more like an attempt to convince the Republican candidates, who we already know from campaigning do not understand the process of evolution.
if a candidate needs to be taught or convinced, he is not a good choice.
In summary, I do not care for this entry.
AdminShawn Otto (cofounder & author of Fool Me Twice: Fighting The Assault on Science, ScienceDebate.org) commented
If the original question poster Joe Rhea accepts the suggested amendment of Anonymous and requests the admin, the question can be rephrased. Also, if enough other commentators request such an amendment we can amend it.
I don't like the way this is worded. It is too easy to duck as assuming the answer. More pointed would be what does it take to convince you?
Robert J. Kolker commented
The issue is NOT climate change, which is manifestly the case. The issue is to what degree is human activity the main cause or driver of the change
Dave B commented
I would avoid use of the word "believe". Rather, "... why do you not accept that both are true."
Belief is for religions and ideologies. We accept or reject a scientific explanation for a phenomenon based on the evidence.