1032 Shares

Do 99% of scientists believe in evolution?

Do 99% of scientists believe in evolution? Topic: Featured articles in newspaper
June 26, 2019 / By Pen
Question: I was reading an article in my always liberal and not always correct college newspaper, The Iowa State Daily. In it, they quote Hector Avalos, professor of philosophy and religious studies as saying the following: "The bill sounds good in its language, but the reality is 99 percent of scientists believe in evolution." convenient statistic......does any body know of a good source for this number? is it just a poll? what constitutes a "scientist" is this just another miss use of microevoulution to mean macroevoulution? How many statistics professors believe in it?
Best Answer

Best Answers: Do 99% of scientists believe in evolution?

Marisa Marisa | 6 days ago
Consider this Creation in the 21st Century “Caught in the Act” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOdByKKvV6I (Part 1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CQb7tS-EjM (Part 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfN3UfoDZkQ (Part 3) Creation In The 21st Century -- From Where did these Layers ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZyoXQJ5Al0 Creation in the 21st Century - Overwhelming Evidence 1 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o226umqLdsU Creation in the 21st Century - Overwhelming Evidence 2 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-4O7AOYLqc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXLFFduC56Y&feature=related Evolution: Against All Odds! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS9o9cbQDLI Creation In The 21st Century - Palace of Dinosaurs Part 2 (1 of 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeK239U2fdE Creation in the 21st Century - Explain God http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqwP3ZuZq1Y
👍 180 | 👎 6
Did you like the answer? Do 99% of scientists believe in evolution? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: Featured articles in newspaper


Marisa Originally Answered: Did Scientists admit that they are wrong on Evolution?
That article was written by an ideological idiot. And evolution is supported on more than just one fossil. It is supported by a vast array of evidence from a wide variety of fields. The theory of evolution has been tested ever since Darwin came up with it, and it has always passed with flying colors. One test is performed every time a paleontologist digs in geologic strata--the results of which could falsify evolution if it is false and verify the creation model if it is true. The results, in fact, verify evolution and falsify the creation model. Evolutionary theory would be falsified if fossils of any of the 5,000 present-day species of mammals, including human, or the 10,000 present-day species of birds were found in the fossil strata where they should not be found (for example, in the same strata with dinosaur fossils). No such finds have been made. But, according to the creationist flood "model" those species should be found in those strata. Here are some other examples in which the theory of evolution has been tested and passed with flying colors. http://www.mathprog.org/Old-Optima-Issue... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scienc... http://www.utm.edu/departments/cens/biol... http://www.physorg.com/news192882557.html http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100512131513.htm http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v297/n5863/abs/297197a0.html The fossil record presents an evolutionary sequence through the strata, and there are numerous examples of transitional forms. http://truth-saves.com/Transitional_Fossils.php http://truth-saves.com/Human_Evolution.php http://truth-saves.com/Our_Ancestors.php http://www.holysmoke.org/tran-icr.htm http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=229081369&blogId=371847244 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feathered_dinosaurs http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1081677.stm http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/thedinobirdconnection/a/dinobirds.htm http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/thedinobirdconnection/a/dinobirds_2.htm http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/c.bkgrnd.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/hominids.html http://www.evolutionfaq.com/videos/transitional-fossils http://chem.tufts.edu/science/evolution/HorseEvolution.htm http://www.theistic-evolution.com/transitional.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossils And these in particular: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/hominids.html Then there is this. About fifty years ago, when it was first noted that apes have 24 pairs of chromosomes, but humans have 23, the creationists subsequently pounced upon that as evidence against the evolution of humans from a common ancestor with the apes. The evolutionary scientists, however, using evolutionary theory and an understanding of genetic modification, proposed that two of the chromosomes must have joined together in the line that led to man from the common ancestor, thus reducing the chromosome number. That prediction has been verified with the results of the recent human and chimp genome projects. It was found that human chromosome 2 is the result of the joining of two chromosomes that have homologues in the chimp. The decoding of the genomes revealed that human chromosome 2 has a stretch of non-functioning telomere coding in the exact place it should be if the two chromosomes had joined in the human line from the common ancestor with the apes, and there is also non-functioning coding for a centromere in the exact location where the extra centromere would be as it occurs in one of the homologous chimp chromosomes, as well as a functioning centromere in the same location as in the other homologous chimp chromosome. Long before the genome projects verified it, this article contained an example of the proposition that two of the ancestral chromosomes joined together to form human chromosome 2. (The link is to an abstract of the article. The full article is available for a fee. Sorry) http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/215/4539/1525 The following site (which is an NIH human genome site), however, does have this statement: "Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes - one less pair than chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and other great apes. For more than two decades, researchers have thought human chromosome 2 was produced as the result of the fusion of two mid-sized ape chromosomes and a Seattle group located the fusion site in 2002." http://www.genome.gov/13514624 These sites explain the finding of the genome projects. http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_chromosome_2 http://www.gate.net/~rwms/hum_ape_chrom.html No creationist pseudo-scientist could make a before-the-fact prediction like that. All they can do is to make up pseudo-explanations after the fact of the finding.

Kristia Kristia
Can anyone believe the late Saddam Hussein when he declared that he has received 100% mandate from 'his people'? That must be the greatest delusion or lie ever created to shame Iraq. An article published by The University of Chicago Chronicle that discussed the above study, stated that 76% of physicians in the United States believe in God, more than the 7% of scientists above, but still less than the 85% of the general population.[218] Another study assessing religiosity among scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science found that "just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power."
👍 70 | 👎 5

Jeana Jeana
I have seen polls of people with doctorates in biology which reveal that over 99% believe in evolution (something like 99.98%). I would imagine among all holders of doctorates in biology it may be a little less, perhaps 99.0%. Among the best scientists, the 3000+ members of the NAS, I saw a poll that stated 100% believed in evolution, 3% believed in the existence of a personal god. And by the way, you can't have microevolution without macroevolution without some magical mechanism that would prevent nucleobase replication errors after populations have been reproductively isolated for more than about 500 generations.
👍 65 | 👎 4

Fancy Fancy
There have been a number of polls that indicate the acceptance of evolutionary theory among scientists exceeds 99%. But perhaps the best way to check is by comparing the lists presented by the Discovery Institute and Project Steve. If the proportion of scientists named Steve (or some variation) is the same in those who accept Evolution as in those who don't - and there's no reason to assume otherwise - then it's a matter of simple mathematics. Compare the number of names on the Project Steve list to the number of Steves on the Discovery Institute list. That will give you an approximate ratio of those of all names who accept Evolution to those who don't. Last time I did that, it came out to about 99.8%.
👍 60 | 👎 3

Constance Constance
It's actually 99.9% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sci... The vast majority of the scientific community and academia supports evolutionary theory as the only explanation that can fully account for observations in the fields of biology, paleontology, anthropology, and others.[16][17][18][19][20] One 1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[21] An expert in the evolution-creationism controversy, professor and author Brian Alters states that "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution".[22] A 1991 Gallup poll of Americans found that about 5% of scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[23][24]
👍 55 | 👎 2

Constance Originally Answered: Scientists speak against the myth of evolution?
Reputable zoologists do not speak against the FACT of EVOLUTION! You are "quote mining", and that is a deceptive logical fallacy. Evolution is a fact. It is the Bible that is a book of myths. I see Truthseeker is doing his routine again.

If you have your own answer to the question featured articles in newspaper, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.