Recent media portrayals link climate change skepticism to evolution skepticism, often as part of a larger “antiscience” tendency related to membership in conservative religious groups. Using national survey data, we examine the link between evolution skepticism and climate change skepticism, and consider religion’s association with both. Our analysis shows a modest association between the two forms of skepticism along with some shared predictors, such as political conservatism, a lack of confidence in science, and lower levels of education. Evangelical Protestants also show more skepticism toward both evolution and climate change compared with the religiously unaffiliated. On the whole, however, religion has a much stronger and clearer association with evolution skepticism than with climate change skepticism. Results contribute to scholarly discussions on how different science issues may or may not interact, the role of religion in shaping perceptions of science, and how science policy makers might better channel their efforts to address environmental care and climate change in particular.
BinderA. (2002). Gathering intelligence on intelligent design: Where did it come from, where is it going, and how should progressives manage it?American Journal of Education, 113, 549-576. doi:10.1086/518488
4.
BoydH. H. (1999). Christianity and the environment in the American public. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 38, 36-44. doi:10.2307/1387582
5.
CampbellR. A.CurtisJ. E. (1996). The public’s view on the future of religion and science: National survey results. Review of Religious Research, 37, 260-267. doi:10.2307/3512278
6.
CoanT. G.HolmanM. R. (2008). Voting green. Social Science Quarterly, 89, 1121-1135. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2008.00564.x
7.
DavidsonD. J.HaanM. (2012). Gender, political ideology, and climate change beliefs in an extractive industry community. Population and Environment, 34, 217-234. doi:10.1007/s11111-011-0156-y
8.
DembskiW. (2010). Intelligent design uncensored: An easy-to-understand guide to the controversy. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
9.
DietzT.DanA.ShwomR. (2007). Support for climate change policy: Social psychological and social structural influences. Rural Sociology, 72, 185-214. doi:10.1526/003601107781170026
10.
DjupeP. A.HuntP. K. (2009). Beyond the Lynn White thesis: Congregational effects on environmental concern. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 48, 670-686. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01472.x
11.
EckbergD. L.BlockerT. J. (1996). Christianity, environmentalism, and the theoretical problem of fundamentalism. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 35, 343-355. doi:10.2307/1386410
12.
EllingsonS.WoodleyV. A.PaikA. (2012). The structure of religious environmentalism: Movement organizations, interorganizational networks, and collective action. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 51, 266-285. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2012.01639.x
13.
EvansJ. H. (2011). Epistemological and moral conflict between religion and science. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 50, 707-727. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2011.01603.x
14.
EvansJ. H.EvansM. S. (2008). Religion and science: Beyond the epistemological conflict narrative. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 87-105. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134702
15.
EvansJ. H.FengJ. (2013). Conservative Protestantism and skepticism of scientists studying climate change. Climatic Change, 121, 595-608. doi:10.1007/s10584-013-0946-6
16.
GauchatG. (2012). Politicization of science in the public sphere: A study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review, 77, 167-187. doi:10.1177/0003122412438225
GoreA. (Producer), & GuggenheimD. (Director). (2006). An inconvenient truth [Motion picture]. Los Angeles, CA: Paramount Pictures.
19.
Haider-MarkelD. P.JoslynM. R. (2008). Pulpits versus ivory towers: Socializing agents and evolution attitudes. Social Science Quarterly, 89, 665-683. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2008.00553.x
20.
HandC. M.Van LiereK. D. (1984). Religion, mastery-over-nature, and environmental concern. Social Forces, 63, 555-570. doi:10.1093/sf/63.2.555
21.
HayesB. C.MarangudakisM. (2000). Religion and environmental issues within Anglo-American democracies. Review of Religious Research, 42, 159-174. doi:10.2307/3512527
22.
HayhoeK.FarleyA. (2009). Climate for change: Global warming facts for faith-based decisions. New York, NY: Faith Words.
23.
HillJ. P. (2014). Rejecting evolution: The role of religion, education, and social networks. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 53, 575-594. doi:10.1111/jssr.12127
24.
HornseyM. J.HarrisE. A.BainP. G.FieldingK. S. (2016). Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nature Climate Change, 6, 622-626. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE2943
25.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2013). Summary for policymakers. In StockerT. F.et al. (Eds.), Climate change 2013: The physical science basis (pp. 3-29). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
26.
JacquesP. J.DunlapR. E.FreemanM. (2008). The organization of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental skepticism. Environmental Politics, 17, 349-385. doi:10.1080/09644010802055576
27.
JonesR. P.CoxD.RiveraN. (2014, November22). Believers, sympathizers, & skeptics Why Americans are conflicted about climate change, environmental policy, and science. Paper presented at American Academy of Religion Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA.
28.
KanagyC. L.NelsenH. M. (1995). Religion and environmental concern: Challenging the dominant assumptions. Review of Religious Research, 37, 33-45. doi:10.2307/3512069
29.
KoniskyD.M.MilyoJ.RichardsonL.E.Jr. (2008). Environmental policy attitudes: Issues, geographical scale, and political trust. Social Science Quarterly, 89, 1066-1085. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2008.00574.x
30.
LacasseK. (2015). The importance of being green: The influence of green behaviors on Americans’ political attitudes toward climate change. Environment and Behavior, 47, 754-781. doi:10.1177/0013916513520491
31.
LongoS. B.BakerJ. O. (2014). Economy “versus” environment: The influence of economic ideology and political identity on perceived threat of eco-catastrophe. The Sociological Quarterly, 55, 341-365. doi:10.1111/tsq.12052
McCammackB. (2007). Hot damned America: Evangelicalism and the climate change policy debate. American Quarterly, 59, 645-668. doi:10.1353/aq.2007.0065
34.
McCreaR.LevistonZ.WalkerI. A. (2015). Climate change skepticism and voting behavior: What causes what?Environment and Behavior. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0013916515599571
35.
McCrightA. M. (2010). The effects of gender on climate change knowledge and concern in the American public. Population and Environment, 32, 66-87. doi:10.1007/s11111-010-0113-1
36.
McCrightA. M.DunlapR. E. (2003). Defeating Kyoto: The conservative movement’s impact on U.S. climate change policy. Social Problems, 50, 348-373. doi:10.1525/sp.2003.50.3.348
37.
McCrightA. M.DunlapR. E. (2010). Anti-reflexivity: The American conservative movement’s success in undermining climate science and policy. Theory, Culture & Society, 27, 100-133. doi:10.1177/0263276409356001
38.
McCrightA. M.DunlapR. E. (2011a). Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among conservative white males in the United States. Global Environmental Change, 21, 1163-1172. doi:10.1177/0263276409356001
39.
McCrightA. M.DunlapR. E. (2011b). The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s views of global warming, 2001-2010. The Sociological Quarterly, 52, 155-194. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x
40.
MohaiP.BryantB. (1998). Is there a “race” effect on concern for environmental quality?Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 475-505. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2749675
PlutzerE.BerkmanM. (2008). Evolution, creationism, and the teaching of human origins in schools. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 540-553. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfn034
47.
PutnamR. D.CampbellD. E. (2010). American grace: How religion divides and unites us. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
48.
SherkatD. E.EllisonC. G. (2007). Structuring the religion-environment connection: Identifying religious influences on environmental concern and activism. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46, 71-85. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2007.00341.x
49.
SmithN.LeiserowitzA. (2013). American evangelicals and global warming. Global Environmental Change, 23, 1009-1017. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.04.001
50.
SteenslandB.RobinsonL. D.WilcoxW. B.ParkJ. Z.RegnerusM. D.WoodberryR. D. (2000). The measure of American religion: Toward improving the state of the art. Social Forces, 79, 291-318. doi:10.1093/sf/79.1.291
51.
SundbladE. L.BielA.GärlingT. (2009). Knowledge and confidence about climate change among experts, journalists, politicians, and laypersons. Environment and Behavior, 41, 281-302. doi:10.1177/0013916508314998
52.
TrueloveH. B.JoiremanJ. (2009). Understanding the relationship between Christian Orthodoxy and environmentalism: The mediating role of perceived environmental consequences. Environment and Behavior, 41, 806-820. doi:10.1177/0013916508328905
53.
WilkinsonK. K. (2010). Climate’s salvation? Why and how American evangelicals are engaging with climate change. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 52, 47-57. doi:10.1080/00139151003626822
54.
WilkinsonK. K. (2012). Between God & green: How evangelicals are cultivating a middle ground on climate change. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
55.
WoodrumE.HobanT. (1992). Support for prayer in school and creationism. Sociological Analysis, 53, 309-321. doi: 10.2307/3711707
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
