I do like maps, even of horrible things

Note that while atheists/agnostics together are the third largest category in the chart, they are omitted from the forecast.

What the hell? That's not nice. Even if the methodology isn't made clear, I still want to see the forecast.

Scandinavia is indeed only nominally protestant. In Sweden the state church is Lutheran and up until about 15 years ago all newborns were entered as members if their parents were. But I know only very few Swedes that are actually religious, and those who are, are usually members of some more odious sect. And nobody goes to church, really.

I love how "indigenous religions" are apparently in contrast to religions like Islam, Judaism, Christianity (indigenous to the Middle East), Hiduism (indigenous to the Indian sub-continent) Buddhists (indigenous to Asia) etc.

Maybe the agnostics and atheists are just spread too thinly through the world. We should start our own country and invite all the nonbelievers and doubters to join us!

In the UK, only about 16% of adults take religion seriously (although far, far more claim to be 'Church of England' when it comes to baptisms, marriages and funerals). That, apparently, makes us Christian.

In terms of active religious observance (i.e. ignoring the vast majority of the population), Islam would appear to be the predominant religion.

But the UK should really be categorised as 'not at all bothered, really'.

at least they were given a chance to declare themselves as atheists or agnostics. Georgetown students are not provided with that option: http://tea.sopca.com/2007/01/23/how-about-irreligious-affiliation/

"But the UK should really be categorised as 'not at all bothered, really'."

Reminds me of the Eddie Izzard sketch about Tea and Cake with the Vicar or Death.
English Inquisition: Cake or death?
Victim: Cake, please.
Inquisitor: Give him cake then. You're lucky we're Church of England.

I posit this map may have some small merit but I see the same flaws here as I see in other such things.

1: The Roman Catholic church immensly overcounts it's members. Once you go in at birth few are ever not counted even if the now attend a different denomination where they are also counted there. All church roles are filled with 'members' who never attend and officially I think it's 1/4 of those on the rolls attend monthly.

2: Since people generally embrace the religion of their parents one may be able to extrapolate the growth of a religion by simply monitoring birth rates in the nations in which the religion occurs.

3: Saying one is counted a Christian says nothing about the real status of the religion. Look at Europe as previously mentioned. As a cultural event maybe but thats about it.

I see it working the other way. It is becoming obvious to me that people are beginning to question the actual meat and bones of religion and even the USA will glide into a 'cultural' religion sooner rather than later.

The internet has alot to do with this. It's simply impossible not to notice the conflicting religious views and dare I say it the rational arguments of atheists and their ilk.

Uber, I agree with your three points and concede that your conclusion is a very real possibility, albeit not in this generation.

Despite the flaws, this is interesting data.

Well ... the map source appears to be the Encyclopedia Britannica -- so Spiegel, like any poor student, simply cribbed its information from a book without bothering to subject it to further research or clarification.

I say that's an automatic F.

Hooray! I want to join Pygmy Loris's new country. Surely it'll feel less claustro than the atheist closet I've been living in all this long while.

For sure the Catholics are overstating their numbers btw.

Apart from PZ's qualms, which I second in full:

I see glaring mistakes in Kalmykia, Kosovo and Bosnia. There are surely more.

It is an unfortunate to use the same color for "Non dominant religion" and "Non religious": I suspect that, say, Czechia and South Korea, or Zambia and Cuba, are not at all similar when it comes to religion.

The methodology doesn't appear to be uniform: While some countries display accurate internal detail, such as Finland and or the US, others do not, like France or Germany.

Some data is just weird: The grey bits of Russia, f.i., what do they stand for? Surely not Islam plus Orthodox Christianity, and also not the latter plus Atheism (that would be the dark red bits instead, and even so a hard stretch). (The orange bits in Russia, BTW, are purest delirium.)

I'm astonished that the map should show most of the northeast of the US as majority Catholic. Can't be right!

P.Z., you will probably be heartened by going to http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm
which has a fascinating group of article summaries, etc. about the US drift, or slide, or crumbling, away from organized religion in recent years, among other neat stuff. I found it by looking for other data on the Northeastern states.

This is a Canadian site, undoubtedly run by agnostics who ride bicycles whereever they go. My personal blessing on their heads. As Jon Stewart once said, "Canada... you're ADORABLE!"

Oh look, two more doofuses!

"Many scientists, including leading international physicists like Hanspeter Dürr and Wolfgang Weidlich, have come out as believers."

My native country is totally misrepresented on this map. Granted, it's hard to fit in a format like this, but they should have tried to do a better job. It's listed as being christian of various denominations and indigenous religions, but that's not accurate at all. There is no dominant religion in Suriname (South America). Christian, muslims, and hindus are probably approximately equally represented, and there are numerous other religions. If they cannot get that right, I don't trust anything else on the map.

it's going to over-represent the importance of religion, which may actually be one of their goals

This is very unlikely to be a goal of Der Spiegel, which is resolutely secularist.

So are you saying you'd like to see coastal California nonreligious or completely depopulated?

(I'd like to see it depopulated of the religious. That'd be great.)

Spiegel might secularist, but I'm not so sure about the sources for the data they used here.

The flattening of the color does make the unpopulated indistinguishable from certain religious groups -- sorry about that, and no, I'm not hoping to see Central and South America and Western Europe depopulated.

PZ: The map on your blog ( Is there another location for this first map? ) does not show all of China to be non religous/no dominant religon. The western half of it is Buddhist. It is possible that the people in the Eastern half are still prodominently old traiditional Chinnese Folk religon.

As far as whether China/Kosovo/former Czech Republic are more likely to be largely atheistic, remember that the governments in these areas do (China) and used to ( Kosov/Czech republic ) make religion illegal, so while there are a fair number of atheists in Eastern Euruope, we should not assume that they mostly are.

Also one the Soviet Union fell, a small number of people in there areas started practicing Pagan ritulas more openly, Maypole dances and other season cellebrations.

Brian

Well, you know that whoever made the forecast was not an evangelical expecting the rapture soon, or plays the video game "Left Behind"

...but I see "Christian" and I think "Liar"

Nope ... terminal commentator bias. No need to read further, folks ... move along, please.

But more seriously, this has got to be the single stupidest comment I've read on a ScienceBlog in some time ...

Re. Scott Belyea:

cough TedHaggard cough...

Japan is classified as Shintoist and Buddhists, but the average Japanese would consider themselves mostly irreligious (Shinto is Buddhism has somewhat become more of a cultural tradition thing than a religion). Unfortunately, Christianity is starting to creep in...

Apparently Canadians are not as quite as adorable as they used to be. A recent newspaper article revealed that we are beginning to lose our humility. The old self-effacing pose is slipping away as we begin to believe that this is in fact the best place in the world to live.

If that happens, we will have one less test to convince ourselves that we aren't indistinguishable from 'Mericans. Soon there may be nothing left but those embarrassing little flag pins.

Come visit Super Natural BC, which has the highest proportion of the non-religious in the country, and probably, the continent.

The map is almost worthless with all its hidden assumptions.

I've seen the exact same pattern before for China, only there the gray part was made explicit to represent the usual Confucian-Daoist mixture, just like the Shinto-Buddhist mixture of Japan.

Russia looks weird.

Is the orthodox stripe across Finland real?

They should really have used percentages. Everyone in New Guinea is either Muslim or Christian? Hard to believe.

The shades of blue scared me there for a second. I was afraid that Mormonism has somehow spread throughout the Middle East *shudder*

Re. Scott Belyea:

cough TedHaggard cough...

Pardon? Was your comment intended to mean something?

What Richard Carter says about the UK, goes for many Western European countries. Large group of people do not really care about religion, although most don't like to call themselves atheists. For example, from what I know about France (yellow=Catholic on the map), I have the impression that a majority should be considered agnostic/ non-religious. Religion barely plays a role in politics (after all they invented separation of religion and state); 10-20% at most goes to church regularly and the rest does not really care. In official statistics the latter group will often be regarded Catholic and even when asked, they may say they are, just because their parents used to be, or perhaps because they were baptized (when they were too young to make a choice). In other words, one problem with these statistics is definition. A reasonable basis would perhaps be a list of well chosen questions forcing people to take a position. One question should be, "Is your religion superior to other religions?" as a measure for fanaticism. You might be surprised by the results in Western Europe: I think many people just like to believe that "there is more", and are to lazy to really think about the details. Of course, that does not really matter if you are only interested in atheists versus the rest.

I agree. Even a few years ago while I was still Christian, whenever I was listening to the radio or watching TV, and heard the next guest was a Christian, I always dreaded hearing what they were going to say. Granted, most people in this country are Christian and most of them are sensible, so I think it may have something to do with the ones that are willing to be interviewed in a national venue, and identify themselves as Christians, as opposed to any other credentials that they might have that would be relevant to what they were being interviewed about.

Ya this map is only giving percentages based on assumptions of a particular religion given historical precedent. It's not intended to really measure "degrees of adherence". I'd wager the US is less religious than it seems, which I know sounds optimistic these days. I talk to people often that say they once were religious, but haven't practiced in years. Some people will also reflexively mark off as one religion or another on a survey if they were brought up that way, when they neither practice it often, or necessarily believe any of it anymore.

Some people also identify as spiritual but not religious, which means they are more in the agnostic column, though not definitively. It is odd that they left agnostic/atheist out, since even Judaism, the smallest demographic BY FAR, is still projected. Also, I didn't know there were so many people with different religions across the expanse of Siberia. This map kind of reminds me of the US map that right wingers always trot out when they say we're a red country under seige by a few blue sites; if you reduce all the red down to the dots that encompass all the little towns they claim, the blue far outweighs the red...that kind of thing.

Sigh... the reason PZ, and others, tend to regard "Christian" sources as of dubious veracity, is because of the very strong tendency for high-profile "Christian" groups and persons (in the US particularly) to be lying hypocrites; the most recent case in point being Haggard's rather spectacular fall from grace.

But it's not fully any more if I have to explain it :(

The map appears to show Northern California is mostly Roman Catholic, which is something I doubt. There is so much cultural diversity here; my wife has started taking our kids to a Buddhist church, because that's what she grew up with.

I very, very seriously doubt we're majority ANYTHING in Sacramento. Does something have the largest plurality? You bet, and that might be Roman Catholic, but honestly, I cannot tell.

I'm one of the Greys, and am hoping to pull as many folks out of the quagmire we call "religion" as possible. Heck, Protestants like to save people; I'd like to see Protestants save 10% on Sundays. They should exit the swamp.

Please, come out of the swamp. We don't want you to cloud your thinking with "Goddidit" as much as you can.

Let me testify to you, sister! Your pastor has been leading you to a life based on myths that each and every 8 year old on the planet suspects is hooey! Admit it to yourself; you've been living a fairy tale!

I don't think my wife believes in a spirit life, either. It's the philosophy, stupid. In my opinion, a religion that forces one to be humble to actual people you've hurt in some way makes more sense than, "Well, I prayed on it, and God forgave me." Uh-uh. Doesn't work. Walk straight to the person and say, "I'm sorry." Not easy, is it? But it makes the world just a tiny bit better, doesn't it?

It's not about what happens to you when you're dead. Ultimately, that's an extremely self-centered philosophy; combined with Christianity's clear conflicts with science, that's two fatal flaws, in my opinion.

Leave the swamp. You'll be so happy you did.

If you look closely at the map you'll see a ghost hovering over Utah chasing a donkey in New Mexico.

(Premonitions of a Romny/Richardson election?)

This is kind of apropos of nothing, but what projection is that map using? Or rather, upon what projection is it loosely based?

I can't help but look at this map and plot my Risk campaign. My money's on the Roman Catholics, though the Muslims have a good shot at it and the Protestants just barely have a chance. The rest of you are screwed though. :)

Yet another problem with the methodology on this is that "No dominant religion/Nonreligious" is probably also used for "No data." Check out Zambia; do you really think that this is the only place in Africa with no dominant religion -- throughout the entire country with no incursions on either side, no less? That interpretation apparently meshes with many of the Eastern European countries as well.

Great news! Atheists & agnostics cover 75% of the Earth! (The ocean part, anyway....)

I love how Northern Ireland is depicted as monolithically Protestant despite being 50-50 Catholic and Protestant.

I think I see the face of Jesus in South America! It's in the middle, sort of like he's wearing a wimple. With horns. But it's Jesus, definitely.

I'm transfixed by the vast rolling acres of calvinists camped out in Central Asia. Self-denial on an epic scale. Who's running that one, Prester John?
Maybe it's like the Tocharians, a sort of archaic periphery job ;)

Wow, look at all the Catholics. Of course, according to the Pope, once a Catholic, always a Catholic, so I guess my current state of non-belief doesn't impact whatever yellow I am contributing to the map.

I was also very surprised to see the amount of godlessness in Eastern Europe, especially places that are "traditionally Orthodox"... of course at some points in history it's been unwise to declare religious affiliation around there... and doubtless in other areas.

Putting aside the source, which of course generates it's own suspicion of bias, I'd have to wonder just HOW this data was collected? Is it based on asking individuals their religious affiliation? Church attendance? Some other measure? It's ridiculously over simplistic.

Color me grey, thank you.

In your ideal world, New Zealand doesn't exist? You bastard! That's where I live!

Wiping part (or all, even) of Australia off the map, however, is an eminently sensible proposition.

12.5% of the world's pop is agnostic? How is this term being used?

Don't you know that the Christians can easily accomodate an all-gray world into their adaptable worldview? They can simply say that at that point the rapture has occurred, leaving only the sodomites, child molestors, and atheists behind!

The 'godlessness' of the majority of Chinese hasn't much to do with the communist government. Taiwan is no more religious than China. It is more of a cultural thing, which probably could be credited to the influential philosopher Confucius, who said 'how can one know about death before one knows about life,' and who created about the only major ancient moral code I know of that worked without threatening its subjects with gods and afterlife. To be sure, there are superstitions (lighting candles to ancestors, karma, feng shui, etc.) and there are mythologies in the literature, but none of which were really canonized and organized in such ways that would constitute a religion in the context we are familiar with, and it is safe that people can tell between literature and reality.

It amuses me how much this baffles certain scholars who maintain that religion is a universal human trait. I have seen China labeled as Taoist/Vajrayana/Zen/Confucianist or even having 'Chinese traditional religion' - kind of like oh there must be a dominant religion on that part of the map there, but since we know nothing about China we will just call it the Chinese religion.

Wiping part (or all, even) of Australia off the map, however, is an eminently sensible proposition.

But, where would all the Kiwis move then, eh? :-)

Wow. Just wow. What a carefully-cartographed load of bullcrap.

Seriously, I know that one shouldn't rely on one's own experiences when calling out a false theory (large flocks of other people being, presumably by definition, superior) but no way is the "indigenous religions" bit accurate for Canada, and given the detailed information Statistics Canada has made available to the public there is simply no excuse for research this shoddy. I would go out on a limb and say that the dominant religion of the coastal regions of BC between the Sunshine Coast and Alaska is indigenous, and that the same is true of the north part of Vancouver Island and a far more significant part of the interior than is shown. What, did they just mark all areas under a certain population density as "Protestant" or something?

Also, no way is Quebec that indigenously religious. Pas possible!

Kadin,
If Australia was wiped off the map, where would New Zealanders get real jobs?

if they'd bothered to pick a color for "apatheist", then that would've been a better choice for most of the scandinavia i grew up in. and that band of orthodoxy they've got going bar sinister across finland? i have no idea where they got that from. Russian orthodoxy is admittedly the largest minority religion back home, but it isn't that large, nor is it geographically distributed that way.

That swathe of Orthodox across Finland and northernmost Finland cannot possibly right. Oulu, a city within the belt, alone has more than twice as many inhabitants as the Finnish Orthodox Church has members.

Clearly, the typing gods have not been with me lately. That should read "across Finland and northernmost Norway".

Raincoaster's right about Canada. If the map had more detail, for example, it would have to show Vancouver and its suburbs as a mix of colours, maybe 70 per cent Christians of various stripes, with healthy doses of Buddhism, Sikhism, Islam, New Age stuff and non-religious. Hell, there are suburbs where fewer than 50 per cent of the population are practicing Christians.

I note that the only dot of Sikhism on the map was in northern India, in the Punjab. There are more than 100,000 Indo-Canadians living around British Columbia, most of them Sikhs who came, or whose parents, grandparents etc came from that tiny dot of the Punjab.

Compare that population, which doesn't show up at all, to the vast swaths of the Canadian north which are labelled indigenous. There are fewer than 100,000 people in those areas - some of them may have fewer than 10,000. So the map tells you nothing about population density at all. If you don't know the country you are looking at fairly well, you could get a really bizarre view of how many different sorts of belivers there are.

Maybe I misunderstood, but some of the comments made (including one from you, PZ) seem to employ geography errors:

The map doesn't say that all of China is non-religious... almost half of it (north-west of the black part) is shown as green, i.e. Buddhist, and there's also a bit of blue and white.

And it doesn't say New Guinea is half Muslim and half Christian; the western half is actually Irian Jaya, which is part of Indonesia, which is mostly Muslim. Only the eastern half of the island makes up New Guinea.

That wiggly red swath across Finland looks almost like a mouse-finger error in MS Paintbrush.

The island is still called "New Guinea". The country that covers its eastern half plus New Britain, New Ireland, and so on is called "Papua New Guinea".

JohnnieCanuck: BC is of course very divided, as it is also home to those fringe-still-polygamous Mormons and Trinity Western University, Canada's fundy university.

Edward: Indeed. Confucius is China's Socrates, not its Jesus/Moses/Mohammed. (Even John Locke realized the nontheistic character of the Chinese government, and that was in the 17th century!)

A recent survey in France found 51% catholic, 4% muslim, 1% jewish. (source Le monde des religions, January 2007)

Among the 51% self-declared catholics, though, only 52% believe in the certain or probable existence of god. So from a born-again point of view, I guess, 48% of the 51% of catholics are not really christians.

So about 44% atheists or agnostic, and 25% 'dead-again christians'.

The interesting bit being that between the 80s and now, the catholics went from 71% to 51%...

This map is to be taken with a grain of salt for maybe all other countries.

Great news! Atheists & agnostics cover 75% of the Earth! (The ocean part, anyway....)

I'd say that's open to interpretation. Sure, most squid don't believe a literal Cthulhu, but they are nonetheless ardent practitioners of the relevant cultural rites.

Apart from PZ's qualms, which I second in full:

I see glaring mistakes in Kalmykia, Kosovo and Bosnia. There are surely more.

It is an unfortunate to use the same color for "Non dominant religion" and "Non religious": I suspect that, say, Czechia and South Korea, or Zambia and Cuba, are not at all similar when it comes to religion.

The methodology doesn't appear to be uniform: While some countries display accurate internal detail, such as Finland and or the US, others do not, like France or Germany.

Some data is just weird: The grey bits of Russia, f.i., what do they stand for? Surely not Islam plus Orthodox Christianity, and also not the latter plus Atheism (that would be the dark red bits instead, and even so a hard stretch). (The orange bits in Russia, BTW, are purest delirium.)

I've seen the exact same pattern before for China, only there the gray part was made explicit to represent the usual Confucian-Daoist mixture, just like the Shinto-Buddhist mixture of Japan.

Russia looks weird.

Is the orthodox stripe across Finland real?

They should really have used percentages. Everyone in New Guinea is either Muslim or Christian? Hard to believe.

The island is still called "New Guinea". The country that covers its eastern half plus New Britain, New Ireland, and so on is called "Papua New Guinea".