Mellor wrote: » Each year the % is growing, so too does the peak. The 25-29 people peaking in 2006 are choosing the same options in 2016 - now in the 35-39 group, it's just that the current 25-29 group are surpassing them.
smacl wrote: » I suspect the peak also relates to the age group that are filling out the census for the first time themselves rather than having it filled on on their behalf by their parents. Realistically, most of those under 18 and many of those still living at home after this will have their religious affiliation declared for them by the person filling out the form who is more likely a self describing Catholic. If the census was carried out individually and in private by those at a younger age, I'd guess the peak would be further back.
Peregrinus wrote: » You're quoting a four-year old article which, obviously, doesn't take into account the results of last year's census....
beauf wrote: » That's why I quoted it to show the change.
beauf wrote: » From a schools point of view you'd have to everyone who is not RC, that is (all other religions + no religions) and the rate of change, as impetus to change the school patronage.
Peregrinus wrote: » Statisticians are a conservative bunch. The problem with a change, as far as they're concerned, is that the data from consecutive censuses will no longer be comparable, which means trends and changes can be less reliably discerned. Given that, simply declaring that you think that all the people who ticked a particular box have misunderstood the question (whereas all the people who ticked the "no religion" box are fearless independent thinkers of particularly piercing intelligence) is not likely to be a sufficiently strong case to induce them to change the question.
Peregrinus wrote: » I think not. You might find a higher percentage of unbelievers in the 15-19 age bracket than you see at present, but I'd still expect the peak to be in the 25-29 bracket.
smacl wrote: » Why so?
smacl wrote: » Mellor wrote: » Each year the % is growing, so too does the peak. The 25-29 people peaking in 2006 are choosing the same options in 2016 - now in the 35-39 group, it's just that the current 25-29 group are surpassing them. I suspect the peak also relates to the age group that are filling out the census for the first time themselves rather than having it filled on on their behalf by their parents. Realistically, most of those under 18 and many of those still living at home after this will have their religious affiliation declared for them by the person filling out the form who is more likely a self describing Catholic. If the census was carried out individually and in private by those at a younger age, I'd guess the peak would be further back.
beauf wrote: » Actually correction.... The largest increases in foreign nationals since 2011 were from people born in Romania and Brazil. Meanwhile, the number of people holding dual Irish nationality almost doubled from 55,905 in 2011 to 104,784 in 2016. Indeed the Census is especially prone to underestimate the numbers of religious minorities of immigrant origin. Therefore, it is of limited use for this purpose. For example, in a survey of Chinese studentsconducted in 2006, just after the Census night of that year, three in ten of the Chinese reported that they were not included in the Census. http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/census-2016-will-get-religion-all-wrong-1.2613938
The largest increases in foreign nationals since 2011 were from people born in Romania and Brazil. Meanwhile, the number of people holding dual Irish nationality almost doubled from 55,905 in 2011 to 104,784 in 2016.
Indeed the Census is especially prone to underestimate the numbers of religious minorities of immigrant origin. Therefore, it is of limited use for this purpose.
For example, in a survey of Chinese studentsconducted in 2006, just after the Census night of that year, three in ten of the Chinese reported that they were not included in the Census.
Mellor wrote: » Probably not tbh. Of people 25-29 who identified as NR, most likely developed that opinion in their adult life, had they had their own private census at 15, they'd prob have been content to stick down RC.
Mellor wrote: » Your first post was referring to the previous census. Some of the conclusions in the article were ridiculous. The greatest % increase is useless as a measure of "fastest growing". What is people declaring "Jedi" went from 5 people to 20 people. 300% increase. Fastest growing or irrelevant minority? Total numbers are pointless too given population growth. Only total % changes is halfway logical. And extrapolating the increase in muslims out to 2043 was silly. As we can see from the actual results, they got that wrong. I'm not sure what the relevance of the dual citizens /migrants is. Most likely the majority of them declared a religion. They'd only be a net NR% increase if there was a greater rate of NR among them. I'd imagine the Brazilians (largest group) were mostly catholic
smacl wrote: » Not saying you're wrong, but what's the logic behind that? My own limited experience from my daughter's friends at that age was that while they were going to a Catholic school and no doubt were listed as Catholic by their parents most of them have no use for the church when asked. I suspect that while some would consider themselves Catholic as a default position, as many would not due to the authoritarian and often regressive position of the church. What strikes me a very different from the generation that I grew up with is the number of openly gay school children and the marked intolerance of their peers to homophobia. I don't know how widespread this is, but would guess it is a growing trend, and one where the RCC has managed to alienate itself from this generation following their stance on same sex marriage. Pure speculation, but I reckon the RCC are going to lose out to the more liberal Christian denominations over time as well as to atheism.
smacl wrote: » Not saying you're wrong, but what's the logic behind that? My own limited experience from my daughter's friends at that age was that while they were going to a Catholic school and no doubt were listed as Catholic by their parents most of them have no use for the church when asked. I suspect that while some would consider themselves Catholic as a default position, as many would not due to the authoritarian and often regressive position of the church.
beauf wrote: » Actually that was my second post. My first was saying the pattern of immigration had changed. it has changed between census and it wasn't what I had assume (experienced either).
But much of this thread is making assumptions. I can't say ridiculous or irrelevant to another assumption because it doesn't suit my argument. If you ever done stats, or data mining, it often shows up something different than you are expecting. As we can see between census the pattern of immigration has changed significantly for those groups.
Mellor wrote: » A few reasons, is consider myself as having no religion, as would a lot of my friends would too, but if you asked me at in my teens, I'd have prob stuck down catholic in a blink without thinking , I'd imagine a lot of similar age would too. It's a mature, adult realisation. It's not something kids are bothered with. As with the gay acceptance you mentioned, the level of NR is no doubt increasing among teens. But I think others will continue only make that decision in their mid-20s
Mellor wrote: » ...We're referring to the actual results, not assumptions about the next one...
beauf wrote: » Actually no we're extrapolating future trends based on that census. Its still assumptions.
beauf wrote: » I don't think you are around kids that much. Most I know have zero interest before secondary school.
Cabaal wrote: » Perhaps, however you can use past census data to see that there's been a steady decline in catholic's in Ireland, this is also reflected in the church's own data about weekly mass attendance which has seen a drop from 50% in 2006 to 30% in 2011.. Based on the census data we are pretty safe to assume that mass attendance is now below 30% number set in 2001 given the 6% drop in Catholics in all of Ireland since 2011 based on the census data. So we can make pretty good guess's on future trends. We merely need to catholic church to survey mass attendance again to merely confirm the drop in weekly mass attendance. Come the census in another few years I'd expect to see the catholic percentage dropping another few percentage points, Given the highest group of non-religious are in the 20-30 age bracket and this bracket are also the biggest group putting kids into school their kids are also likely to be non-religious over time which will only reinforce the drop in Catholics in Ireland.
darjeeling wrote: » Among younger working age adults (25-44), only 73% were born in Ireland and 14% have no religion. We don't yet know what percentage would be Catholic, but in 2011 it was 80%, so it will now be lower. In 2011, 32% had degrees. Among the over-65s, 92% were born in Ireland (most of the rest were UK born) and 3% have no religion. In 2011, 91% of this age group were Catholic, and 10% had degrees. These growing differences between generations mirror those seen in the US, UK and other Western European countries. As there, we've also seen a breakdown in confidence in established political parties here. But we haven't seen the kind of backlash movements that led to Brexit, Trump and might yet elect Marine le Pen. I wonder why is that?
Peregrinus wrote: » What’s more interesting, though, unbelief is at it’s highest in among those in their thirties, who are presumably the parents of children aged under 10, where unbelief is below average. Are unbelieving parents recording their children as believers? I doubt that. The only explanation I can think of is that unbelievers have fewer children, but I can’t see any obvious reason why that should be so.
