That chart seems to be taken from this report/survey:

http://www.pewforum.org/2012/10/09/nones-on-the-rise/

So it's just for the US. And as I said, it's well known that religious affiliation is falling in almost all rich western countries.

That report itself states:

"Societies where people’s daily lives are shaped by the threat of poverty, disease and premature death remain as religious today as centuries earlier. These same societies are also experiencing rapid population growth. In rich nations, by contrast, the evidence demonstrates that secularization has been proceeding since at least the mid-twentieth century (and probably earlier) – but at the same time fertility rates have fallen sharply, so that in recent years population growth has stagnated and their total population is starting to shrink. The result of these combined trends is that rich societies are becoming more secular but the world as a whole is becoming more religious."

Sure, indoctrination has negative effects. But the amount of indoctrination varies greatly among various religions/sects. And it's almost impossible to avoid indoctrination altogether - children for example are just as well being indoctrinated in school, where they are usually expected to squeeze certain "truths" into their brains that should not be doubted. The semantic differences between "indoctrination", "socialization" and "education" are rather small.

I don't go to churches but I'm a Christian.

My concern really isn't with the poor nations. They need to focus on building their infrastructure to better the lives of the citizens rather than worry about what its citizens use to cope with being impoverished. In time, these nations will overcome impoverishment (hopefully) and at that point the numbers will be more reflective of the wealthier nations.

I've never been in a single institution that forbids you from questioning the subject matter. Every single one I've ever attended encouraged questions. Then again, I never attended any religious schools so perhaps it's different there.

Wiki cites indoctrination as:

Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine).^[1] It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.

This is a fair assessment I suppose. While there is some overlap between indoctrination and education, it's very slim in that certain axioms persist and are necessary to build upon for a foundation on the side of education; whereas indoctrination is essentially "hey kids, this book is the word of god!"

there's roughly 7 billion people on the planet, and of those... yes.. I'm sure you're the only person who doesn't like organized religion.
you've really given the rest of us some things to consider.

That's a horrible comment.  I'm religious and I am certainly not weak in any aspect.  It's also untrue, as there are lots of weak non-religious people.  In fact, I've observed a trend of people at the lowest section of academic scores to be among those most likely to proclaim themselves strong atheists.  They make profound proclamations of being people of science who are wiser than those who are religious.  It is a sign of being uneducated in science to proclaim "truth".

I have a high level scientific education and one thing I know for certain is the lack of certainty in our scientific knowledge.  It is mostly theories, not truths.  But if it makes you feel good about yourself to call others weak or think you know the "truth" about the universe, fill your boots!

@the last starfighter

heh.. I find it interesting that your high level of scientific knowledge leaves you with the certainty that our scientific knowledge as a whole is missing exactly that; certainty.
what a silly thing to say.
is that not what science is; the search for and understanding of the immutable laws that govern life, existence, and what lies beyond?
Over the centuries science has, and will to continue to, discover and eventually prove what it finds as irrefutable fact. Examples: the speed of light, the force of gravity etc,...
What has religion proven?
Nothing.
Every religion is a hierarchical system of postulates woven into the fabric of facts, spliced into the realities of our daily lives; as in, I am alive and I know that for a fact and I've been told that my life, my being alive, is because of a god that granted that life to me.
See. A simple belief, an unproven idea, worked into the truth of something else and thereby, by proxy, accepted as fact.
At the very least, science attempts to avoid this and prove only that which can actually be validated.
You state that there's no certainty in scientific knowledge yet openly admit to believing in a different system where certainty and proof are avoided.. well.... religiously.
Stating that religion is for weak minded people is an ugly generalization, but that stereotype exists, and is somewhat accurate, because those that question why and how we got here do so from an intellectual basis. They find it hard to accept the simplicity of those that choose not to ask, but instead, readily accept an answer that's been given to them.
There's nothing wrong with either school of thought, but there are certain attributes, specific details about an individual that are similar within each group. And, much like you stated in your post above;
the one thing 'I' know for certain is that the more simple a person is, the weaker they are intellectually, the more likely they are to believe in god.

I am not a fan of disorganized religion. This personalized, and subjective said "spirituality" where everyone rolls their own thing, and thinks they get all the benefits of God, but all they get is their own idolatry, really doesn't do much of anything. When you end up getting is a person's subjective ideals in a package said to be a subjective eternal being.