Today, Theos has published the findings of the biggest and most comprehensive research project ever carried out into UK public opinion on evolution and human origins, ahead of a major conference tomorrow (Tuesday) in Rome on religion and science. The findings of the research are predictable, surprising and confusing – all at the same time.

It's not especially surprising, for example, that 54% of people know that Charles Darwin wrote The Origin of Species, or even that 1% wrongly think he wrote The Naked Chef by Jamie Oliver. The poll was conducted in November 2008 before the Darwin celebrations began. I imagine public knowledge about Darwin will be significantly greater by the end of 2009.

It's unsurprising, perhaps, that only 15% of people know that Charles Darwin was a self-described agnostic towards the end of his life (21% think he was a Christian and 20% think he was an atheist). The 'co-opting' of Darwin by the New Atheists might imply one thing, but his burial in Westminster Abbey quite another. In reality, Darwin’s beliefs fluctuated and were more complex than people are often willing to accept.

It is intriguing that 37% of people believe that humans evolved by a process of evolution which removes any need for God. 28% of people think that humans evolved by a process of evolution which can be seen as part of God’s plan. 11% believe in Intelligent Design (the idea that humans evolved by a process of evolution which required the special intervention of God or a higher power at key stages) and 17% believe that human beings were created by God some time within the last 10,000 years.

So, what are we to make of these findings?

First, it's interesting to note that as many people are coming to faith in God as losing it, 8% of people to be precise (see full report). The crude but popular narrative of decline regarding religious belief is incorrect. The belief landscape in the UK is, like Darwin's faith, more complex.

Second, it's clear that there is a great deal of confusion in the UK about these issues. Some of the 37% who believe that 'humans evolved by a process of evolution which removes any need for God' also profess to believe in God elsewhere in the poll. It's possible that, philosophically, people think evolution removes the need for God, but continue to believe for other good reasons. Out of the 17% of people who are self-described creationists (the idea that God created the world some time within the last 10,000 years), only 11% believe it is either 'definitely' or 'probably' true.

Thirdly, a significant number of people in the UK believe that you can't do both God and Darwin. Strangely, this is one issue (the only one perhaps) that 'fundamentalists', atheist and religious, are likely to agree on.

In amongst this blizzard of statistics, is there anything that Darwin himself has to 'teach' us?

The answer is a great deal. One surprising and little known fact about Darwin is that from 1867 until his death in 1882 he made an annual subscription to the funds of the South American Missionary Society. Indeed, he asked to be made an honorary member and was generally very positive about the impact missionaries had on society, both at home and abroad. During his lifetime, he exchanged letters with nearly 2,000 correspondents, many of whom were clergymen or committed Christians whom Darwin admired for their scientific credentials. And in 1879 Darwin wrote to John Fordyce: "It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent Theist & an evolutionist." Taken together, such actions and opinions suggest strongly that Darwin considered belief in God and evolution compatible.

Those who still doubt evolution should read Darwin's The Origin of Species with care and weigh the now overwhelming evidence, hugely strengthened by recent advances in genetics, which points to the theory's validity. (Of course, they might be more willing to accept evolution if they don't think they are required to make a false choice between evolution or God).

Finally, all of us who are interested in issues of science and religion should be challenged by Darwin’s example of how to disagree without being disagreeable. On his death the South American Missionary Society's journal noted that "a great man has done from among us ... of the most unblemished character, of the highest intellectual power ... a sincere and persevering searcher into truth, ... never prone to dogmatize or force his conclusions on others with a view to assail their convictions or to attack existing systems." In a letter to J. Brodie Innes, the vicar of Downe with whom he shared a lifelong friendship, Darwin wrote: "I hardly see how religion & science can be kept ... distinct. But... there is no reason why the disciples of either school should attack each other with bitterness." In all the sneering and aggression that debates about religion and science can provoke today, not least on this blog, we would all do well to emulate the grace and courtesy exhibited by Charles Robert Darwin.

Paul Woolley is Director of Theos.