Chapman University Survey Finds Astonishing Levels of Belief in Ancient Astronauts and Atlantis

10/17/2016

Last October I wrote about a depressing survey from Chapman University which found that 1 in 5 Americans—20.3%--professed to believe in ancient astronauts. A couple of regular readers let me know that this year Chapman University repeated the survey, and the results were even worse. According to the annual survey’s new results, fully 1 in 4 Americans, an astonishing 27%, believe that aliens visited the Earth in the past. Even more disturbing, 39.6%--more than one in three—believe that Atlantis or another advanced prehistoric lost civilization once existed. (The survey did not ask about Atlantis last year.) Similarly, 42.6% of respondents believe that the U.S. government is covering up knowledge of alien encounters, and a full third think that elites are plotting a single world government.

The more detailed full results show that only 29% of respondents disagree that Atlantis existed, while a more robust 40.7% disagree that aliens visited the Earth in the past. In both cases, about one third of all respondents couldn’t decide whether Atlantis or ancient astronauts existed.

According to the analysis accompanying the survey, two factors that are most closely associated with holding beliefs in paranormal phenomena like ancient astronauts or lost civilizations are low education and low income. The analysis also named both religiosity and lack of church attendance as associated factors, suggesting that people with a complicated relationship with religion—believers who have a lack of connection to their community of faith—are most open to paranormal claims.

The survey asked respondents about a fictional conspiracy—the “North Dakota crash”—and found that one third of all respondents believed it was being covered up. Apparently, respondents are either Puckish pranksters or generally believe that America is rife with conspiracies.

The usual caveats apply: The question on ancient astronauts was phrased loosely enough that one might reasonably interpret it to refer to scientific hypotheses such as panspermia, though it is doubtful that respondents interpreted it that way. Similarly, the question about Atlantis is ambiguous enough that some respondents might have assumed it referred to real Bronze Age-style archaeological cultures. The numbers also have a margin of error since they reflect the views of 1,511 adults, comparable to the number surveyed last year. Conceivably, the choice of whom to survey might account for some of the difference between the results from year to year. It’s also worth noting that a 2005 Gallup Poll found 24% of Americans believed in ancient astronauts, suggesting that the surveys are revolving around a rather stable general level of belief.

That said, this is a remarkable difference in the Chapman University results from just one year ago.

Think about that. If these numbers are generalizable, then 86 million American believe in ancient astronauts, and 127 million believe in Atlantis or another lost civilization.

It is probably no coincidence that the History Channel proudly announced that a new season of Ancient Aliens is on the horizon, with one of its episodes to screen as a featured attraction at this month’s Alien Con, a convention of ancient astronaut theory and science fiction fans.

But why would more people believe in ancient astronauts and Atlantis this year than last? I don’t see an obvious reason, and since the survey was conducted in April, we can’t even blame it on a general increase in crazy and paranoid beliefs this election season, though the survey did conclude that Republican political leanings were closely associated with belief in conspiracy theories. This is on par with anecdotal and scholarly observations that rightwing political beliefs are closely tied to conspiratorial views about the government, space aliens, and all-powerful elites.

37 Comments

Bob Jase

10/17/2016 10:46:38 am

Well I believe in the possiblity of ancient astronauts - I just haven't seen any evidence to support that it happened.

Similarly I think it very likely there were 'advanced' communitiess in that they were technologically ahead of most of humanity but not the super-scientific pseudo Atlantis type crap. How much evidence would a community that developed agriculture around 20k years ago leave if it only persisted a few generations before being wiped out by a natural disaster.

Time Machine

10/17/2016 11:13:39 am

>>>possiblity of ancient astronauts<<<

Life is a one-off accident in the universe on Planet Earth
The combination of requirements cannot be replicated.

An Over-Educated Grunt

10/17/2016 12:29:32 pm

Life is a series of chemical reactions. If it happened once it can happen again. If it can happen, it either has or will. Further, only the chain of reactions we recognize right now as life has been explored even slightly. The full range of reactions possible has not. The best you can manage is that it's improbable. Impossible requires more information than you have.

10/17/2016 11:16:30 am

>>>believers who have a lack of connection to their community of faith—are most open to paranormal claims<<<

If Richard Carlile was alive today he would comment "Even De-Christianised people believe in rubbish".

10/17/2016 11:21:33 am

Still need to recognize the fact that most people, even in responsible positions in society, do not think critically and are unaware of scepticism.

Millions of people are still unaware of scepticism versus gullibility.

Critical thinking is not on the curriculum in schools, colleges and universities.

Graham

10/17/2016 11:53:20 am

Exactly. I have read a study that states that Women and Minorities should not study science because obectivity is 'racist' & 'sexist' I have also seen a video calling for science to fall because it is 'colonialism', those calls emenate from the Left. And then become the ammunition used by demagogs like Trump to gather supporters.

Ken

10/17/2016 01:56:00 pm

Well, how about the 40% of people who think T should be President.

I'm sure that all of them also think there is a conspiracy between the press, the establishment GOP, the Democrats, and everyone else to stop him from becoming President. (There is such a conspiracy, not because he might change things, but because he is such a huge A-hole.)

Quite true

10/18/2016 12:01:51 pm

Yes, It's exactly this gullibility and lack of critical thinking that has so many people believing the in non-existence of UFO's, "ancient aliens" and a worldwide coverup.

Kal

10/17/2016 12:31:03 pm

The survey is likely a focus group, not a large enough polling group to make an informed hypothesis. They would need to go beyond that university and poll upwards of 2,000 people elsewhere also. Having been in liberal centrist university campus polling stuff, this looks to be like crowd speak. They're all college students that think a certain way because they are in college. A commuter college, such as San Jose state, or Santa Clara, would be less inclined to even take the survey, and most would have no opinion unless it involved tuition fees or book fees or the cost of living there. This is how the Faux News gets away with interviewing clueless people on the college campus. They don't interview the smart ones in front of the science building. They find the flaky ones that just smoked a bowl in the dorm off campus and are wigging out behind the student union.

gdave

10/17/2016 01:51:16 pm

The survey was conducted BY Chapman University, not AT Chapman University. The survey-takers were "a random sample of 1,511 adults from across the United States."

Titus pullo

10/19/2016 05:56:58 pm

Liberal centrist. You must be joking. Other than engineering schools most colleges and universities are far left. As for critical thinking or lack if such I would suggest as less kids take up the hard sciences and engineering and go into paraprofessional like ot and pa. And others in social science you will expect this. Specifically social "science". Which as Hayek pointed out is more about political ideologies cherry picking facts than robust scientific method (how many esp experiments in psych depts) you just get minds that don't question. Some of the race focused and gender garbage polemics dominating colleges is just another example. And I disagree with Fox. I find Fox business to be very open to different views from keynians to Austrians unlike Bloomberg or CNBC.

And I've found attacking people for logic bending beliefs just hardens them. Usually people change their mind when talking to like minded folks who are so ridiculous even a believer starts to question them.

Tom

10/17/2016 01:25:08 pm

I rather suspect that a similar poll in Britain would produce a similar result.
However, when reality (as always) reasserts itself such beliefs will be revealed as only of momentary interest and even the cranks will have found other (perhaps more lucrative) mind bogglers.

David Bradbury

10/17/2016 03:20:52 pm

A rough British equivalent would be this 51,000 respondent poll from YouGov:
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/03/26/o-we-of-little-faith/
which finds, inter alia, that even among Christians, only a minority believe in the Devil (24%) and Hell (27%).

GEE

10/17/2016 02:29:40 pm

The Survey can take so many different forms. Age of the person taking the Survey? What state do you live in?.. What is your Religion? These and many more are factors for the reasoning behind the Survey. If the Survey is done by College Students, all they have seen while growing up is Sci Fi Movies. Creatures from another planet.. etc... If you hear it enough, without even thinking about it, it becomes second nature... and then the survey finds. Its really not surprising., and as the children get older the numbers will grow.

Brady Yoon

10/17/2016 07:17:32 pm

"elites are plotting a single world government."

What is so implausible about a scenario in which powerful people seek to increase their power? Alexander the Great wanted to rule the world. So did Napoleon. Why do you suppose that the most powerful people in the most powerful nation wouldn't want to rule the entire world? Heck, we're already almost there.

I'm not saying that the SPECIFIC conspiracies that the one world government types peddle is in any way plausible. But as for the GENERAL suspicion that elites would want more power? Wouldn't it be more surprising if they didn't want to rule the world?

Jason Colavito link

10/17/2016 07:57:30 pm

The difference is that the "one world government" conspiracy doesn't argue that different elites want to rule the world but that all the elites are working together to rule the world, which is manifestly at odds with the fact that the governments of Russia, China, America, etc. do not seem to agree on much, much less erasing national sovereignty for a supranational dictatorship.

10/17/2016 08:22:02 pm

What do you call NATO, ANZAC, the US-Japan-South Korea alliance? Sounds like all the elites "working together to rule the world to me."
China and Russia are exceptions, yes, but how many others are there, really? North Korea? ISIS? Iran? That's an awfully short list, considering there are over 200 countries in the world.

Uncle Ron

10/17/2016 11:11:39 pm

The real one-world-government types think that the conflicts between supposedly antagonistic countries are actually artificial and scripted by the parties involved for their own inscrutable purposes. Some day when the time is right they will all come together publicly and announce that they are now running everything.

It should be obvious to anyone with half a brain that if all the countries on the planet truly cooperated, didn't constantly bicker and cheat one another, and spent their military, espionage, and security budgets on the general welfare, no one would want for anything and we could probably solve all the truly important global problems. Human beings, being what they are, and for the most part not having half a brain, it will never happen.

10/17/2016 09:10:27 pm

Also, you are aware there's a difference between the Ancient Astronaut and the Ancient Alien hypotheses, right? You seem to be using the terms interchangeably.

10/18/2016 02:41:15 pm

So...what, Ancient Astronauts are aliens from another world who showed up in the distant past to interact with ancient humans, and Ancient Aliens are...aliens from another world who showed up in the distant past to interact with ancient humans?

Don't just make a statement like that, sir. Elucidate. Because I am not seeing a difference. Not even as much difference as I can see between Lutherans and Baptists, which is pretty much that they have different names and not much more. (No, I'm not Christian, duh, that would be why I can't see the differences Lutherans and Baptists see themselves?)

10/18/2016 05:04:12 pm

The term "ancient astronauts" leaves open the possibility of the astronauts being our own ancestors, whereas the term "ancient aliens" explicitly excludes it.

Only Me

10/19/2016 01:17:03 am

Not true. AAT is promoted by a cable show called Ancient Aliens. The proponents on the show use the term aliens all the time. They have explicitly suggested, if not outright stated, that aliens created the human race through genetic experimentation. They also explicitly suggest, if not outright state, those same aliens ARE our ancestors.

There is no distinction made by the talking heads themselves; therefore, there is no distinction that needs to be made by Jason or anyone else.

scott link

10/17/2016 09:45:48 pm

ANZAC . Are you kidding me? ANZAC stands for Australian New Zealand Army Corps. It was a unit raised by the British in 1915 for WWI, it was disbanded after the armistice. The only time it is really used is in April for The ANZAC Day of Rememberance, which is their Memorial Day. Yes, the two nations have mutual defense treaties but the operative word is DEFENSE. They are in no way working towards "ruling the world"

As far as the mutual defense pact between the US, Japan and South Korea, are you aware that the Korean War has never ended? there was a cease fire signed but never a peace treaty. As a matter of fact, until recently the Japanese could NOT engage in overseas combat. In other words, the Japanese would fight if attacked but would not engage in a war of aggression. Once again it is a mutual defense treaty that is meant to protect the safety and freedom of Japan and South Korea.

As far as NATO is concerned, it was created to counter the Warsaw Pact of the Soviet Union and the danger it posed to Europe. It has never engaged in an aggressive war of conquest. In fact the only war that it has engaged in is the Kosovo War and that was to stop the genocide. So no Mr. Yoon, it is not " elites working together to rule the world", also, Alexander the Great and Napoleon were not a group of elites. Quite frankly they were two extremely talented generals who just happened to be meglamaniacal who wanted to rule the world. Just like the British, Genghis Khan, Kublai Khan and many others who throughout history have lived to conquer.

T. Franke link

10/18/2016 07:02:46 am

Let me try a general answer: Behind it all is a loss of trust in government, academic, and others. Then, own theories are Made up, and mostly bad ones, unfortunately. So wie have to ask: Did politicians behave so that you could loose trust in them? (Hahaha ...) But seriously, did they more than usual? - Did academics give reasons for distrust? From a German perspective, both is a clear yes. Elites do less and less bother for the real needs and sorrows of their peoples, and act often according to wishful thinking. Academics Support this, too often, instead of debunking the wishful thinking and showing the sad reality. Including academic controversies, which are often silenced for the broader public. Trust is decreasing obviously, in our days, generally and broadly.

Oliver Smith link

10/20/2016 05:26:46 pm

Franke, why do you create fake reviews of your books on Amazon?

Note the only two reviews on Amazon for Franke's books are accounts that have reviewed no other products. These are just Franke pretending to be Melville E Nicholls
http://archive.is/2yEg8 and Ralf Bülow
http://archive.is/8vTgW

Jojo

10/18/2016 09:15:14 am

Great read. I think many of these "ancient aliens" concepts are there to degrade Christianity. In addition much of this has been done intentionally. Sure we all know there is a likelihood of other life in the universe etc. With that said it is sad that the documentation is always hazy and distant or now simply computer enhanced. Other subjects like Bigfoot, channeling, remote viewing, and such we are supposed to take on faith based on others observations. Meanwhile no deceased Bigfoot remains because there is a conspiracy by the Smithsonian to hide all this (LMAO). These subjects are like a doorway left there for you to be led down so you don't see other things possibly. I think a lot of this is related to the struggle between secular and Christian points of view in the United States and other places w/ a similar view. The Mary Magdalene and Bloodline concepts also expose this same conflict between the Latin Church and Coptic and Orthodox views earlier in history.

Geoffrey Sea

10/18/2016 12:30:17 pm

The explanation for the rise lies in the generally higher level of anxiety and depression. The beliefs fill a need. As the need increases, the beliefs increase. Is it any worse to believe in ancient aliens than to believe in an invisible tripartite sky god?

As for "an advanced prehistoric lost civilization," depending on the definition of "advanced ," I think scientists would have to agree. It is virtually certain that there remain unknown ancient civilizations, and that these civilizations did account for certain as-yet unexplained phenomena such as language families that stretch around the globe. Of course, they did not have nuclear weapons or electric lights, but if "advanced" means that they developed science and mathematics, the belief is well-founded. See the Nostratic Hypothesis, which is close to becoming mainstream in linguistics.

10/18/2016 02:38:23 pm

The problems lie in the specifics of the claim. 1. It's being claimed that "advanced" does not in fact mean "developed languages that still exist" but rather a significantly larger gap in technology and knowledge, 2. that this ancient civilization is specifically WHITE during a time period before white people existed, and 3. that no other civilization since ever developed anything on its own (except the Romans and later Europeans), it's all handed down from this civilization.

The real problem with ANY "lost civilization" theory, though, is finding evidence that it existed. Language families may be some evidence of that, though by themselves they're not STRONG evidence, given that some of these reconstructed linguistic groups are based on modern interpretations of hypothesized ancient sounds. ...and I would like more evidence that the hypothesis you're talking about is "close to becoming mainstream," because while I'm not seeing anything saying "It's junk," I'm also not seeing anything saying, "Yeah, this is probably the most likely explanation," either. Not to mention that even if it were, it doesn't even remotely provide evidence for a TECHNOLOGICALLY-ADVANCED unified culture. You don't have to be technologically advanced to make up words. You don't have to have science or math, either.

As for your explanation of the rise of belief in ancient aliens, it's....overly simplified and more than a little condescending. Also, yes, in some ways it IS much, much worse to believe in ancient aliens than to believe in an invisible sky god, because the invisible sky gods of the world aren't generally perverting science, history, and multiple cultural accomplishments in order to make their case for existence, or at least not wholesale.

Christine Erikson link

10/23/2016 10:56:51 am

the big problem in the arguments about advanced ancient civilization is that the non democratic nature of such societies we know of like Egypt and Babylonia is ignored. Specifically, that while some simpler things like pottery and weaving etc. get promulgated by trade and so forth, anything really odd is going to be limited two ways: things like electroplating (which the Baghdad Battery shows could have been done and which some ancient gold plated remains look a lot like were the results of which) would be kept in a few families to maximize profit, there being no patent offices, and if it could make you look or be pragmatically superior, would be kept by priests and kings to make them look divine and occasionally find military use.

So, if there was genetic engineering (war being a jump starter for technology in general, and Genesis 6 says the earth was filled with violence) and flight and space faring, it wouldn't have been commonplace enough to leave artifacts. Anybody see that series After Man (I think that's the title) which shows how fast things would deteriorate to nothing if humans suddenly disappeared?)

Which brings me to my own ancient alien or whatever hypothesis - that aliens did not make us WE MADE THEM. That they are the results of genetic engineering adding insect, reptile, amphibian, etc. DNA to humans for various purposes, and the ones reported now descend from GMO humans offworld when the Flood hit.

A Possible History of Life on Mars by Christine Erikson on amazon kindle discusses this from a biblical perspective.

aliens made us is great propaganda if there are some out there looking to move back in and take over.

10/18/2016 05:44:25 pm

Its not really depressing since these surveys are non-academics. Who really cares what they think - they aren't specialists or educated on these topics.

Feder 1984 surveyed US teaching archaeologists. Only 1.3% support the existence of Atlantis. For ancient astronauts, 0.0%, Bigfoot: 4.2%, Lochness monster: 2.4%.

"Not surprisingly, archaeologists who discuss these topics have little sympathy for ancient astronauts, creationism,
Barry Fell, Atlantis, Tut's curse, Goodman's claims, or the claimed contemporaneity of dinosaur footprints." https://www.jstor.org/stable/280358

Check the new special issue of shima journal here:

http://shimajournal.org/issues.php#v10n2

article 1
http://shimajournal.org/issues/v10n2/c.-Dawson-Hayward-Introduction-Shima-v10n2.pdf

"As Smith
discusses in the opening article in this theme issue, the lost island-continent was – in all
likelihood – entirely Plato’s invention for the purposes of illustrating arguments around
Grecian polity. Archaeologists broadly agree with the view that Atlantis is quite simply
“utopia” (Doumas, 2007), a stance also taken by classical philologists, who interpret
Atlantis as a metaphorical rather than an actual place (Broadie, 2013; Gill, 1979; Nesselrath,
2002). One might consider the question as being already reasonably solved but despite the
general expert consensus on the matter, countless attempts have been made at finding
Atlantis."

My article here-
http://shimajournal.org/issues/v10n2/d.-Smith-Shima-v10n2.pdf

10/19/2016 07:53:49 am

Who really cares that the majority of the electorate believes in fairies? It's not like they would ever elect a man who reflects their views!

Or for a slightly darker take, who cares that the plebs think Germany was stabbed in the back, not strained to breaking on the field? It's not like they are experts on anything.

Buddy, if you use "who really cares, they're not experts," time will come when a wave of them will rise up, swamp your ivory tower, and drown you.

10/19/2016 09:04:16 am

Politics and science are two different things. Maybe you missed this.

Lyle Francis Selp

10/23/2016 10:05:25 am

All depends on how the question is phrased. Were they to ask simply "Don you believe Atlantis existed?", I would reply "yes". But, it was Santorini and it blew up and sank into the Mediterranean.

Chris Aitken

10/23/2016 10:06:36 am

Once again, why can't people simply except that we've evolved to our present state? Only thing I disagree on here is that I do believe there were highly advanced civilizations well before what's already been discovered, but that they were advanced in ways that are misunderstood. Perhaps more Lidar mapping will add some credence to this theory? Nevertheless, more and more lost cities, and ancient artifacts are popping up all the time as we speak. As for aliens playing an influence? Nonsense... As a musician I know. Often music is ascribed mystical, spiritual, mythical powers, and has even been attributed to aliens. But wonderful as it is music is just sympathetic, ( or even dissonate ), tones that can only be heard in our specific human hearing range, can only resonate ro be heard in the lower atmosphere of planet Earth, and changes frequency, ( pitch ) on changes in atmospheric pressure, hence, the Doppler effect. Therefore, music is only, and can only be unique to Earth, and human beings. I do have a theory about an interelationship between music, and quantum resonance mechanics, but that's another story...

Steve H Fisher

10/23/2016 11:43:15 am

The difference in studies from year to year is large enough I'd suspect chance is a major factor, even though the sample size is decent.

I'd also say, "Alien life has been to earth within the last 3-4 billion years" is orders of magnitude more likely than the claims of Chariots of the gods or its kids.

Jay

10/23/2016 11:35:38 pm

All this speculation about origins, peoples and races throughout history is going to suffer a real dose of reality as the increasingly widespread application of DNA studies takes place. Welcome to the real world of science.

Tess

10/24/2016 09:42:14 am

One must remember that the Null Hypothesis, the idea that life only originated on Earth, is a placeholder - and not a scientific theory (under a Popper standard of science). And while I agree with its placement as the Null Hypothesis, that does not immediately come incumbent with the requirement to BELIEVE it as well. If our 'educated' and 'higher income' crowd knew actual science, maybe they would not be so gullible.

If you believe in any theory, which has not been crafted into a definable, measurable and structure-able mechanism under the logical calculus of the scientific method, then you are simply following a religion - wearing the robes of science as a masquerade. Heck at least the Bible-Thumpers are honest in frothing over magic. You can claim it is 'scepticism' all you want - but you are believing and promoting an idea which has not shown any evidence in its support, nor really has a definition of any real testable merit. You are no different than the UFO'logist or the Bible Thumper. You simply are drooling all over a placeholder and feeling all sciencey.

Skepticism is about holding a suspension of belief. Not promoting the Null Hypothesis as 'finished science.' If we in real labs and with real hard issues of science conducted our work that way, we would never get anything done.