Many current scientists reject evolution

From EvoWiki

Contents 1 Claim 2 Source 3 Responses 4 Fallacies contained in this claim 5 External Links 6 Related claims 7 See Also 8 Acknowledgments

Claim

Many scientists reject evolution and support creationism.

Source

• Do-While Jones, Some Real Scientists Reject Evolution [1]
• Hall, Steve, and Hall, Vickie, Interesting Quotations from Scientists on Evolutionism [2]
• Christian Answers Network, Do real scientists believe in Creation? [3]

Responses

1. Given as how creationists rarely, if ever, state who these current scientists are, or even if they are in relevant fields, this claim is worthless. In the cases where a list is given, the list consists of non-scientists, scientists in irrelevant fields, scientists who died before Darwin was born, scientists who accept evolution and believe in God and scientists who were quoted out of context as rejecting evolution.
2. Considering the above statement is said by a creationist, the response should be: "many current scientists who you know reject evolution."
3. Many scientists argued, alongside the Church, against Galileo and Copernicus. This did not make the Sun revolve around the Earth.
4. 'Many' is different from 'most'; looking at what percentage of scientists accept or reject evolution would be a more useful measurement of the prevailing attitude toward the theory. Evolution is in fact accepted by the vast majority of scientists, biologists even more so.
5. Contrary to the claim, evolution currently receives nearly universal support from scientists. There are significant instances where scientists and science organizations have reaffirmed their support of evolution. [4]
6. Imre Lakatos quote: "The cognitive value of a theory has nothing to do with its psychological influence on people's minds. Belief, commitment, understanding are states of the human mind. But the objective, scientific value of a theory is independent of the human mind which creates it or understands it. Its scientific value depends only on what objective support these conjectures have in facts.", [5]
7. If the claim is referring to people such as Michael Behe, it's worth mentioning that the only reason Behe still has a job at Lehigh University is because he has tenure. Lehigh has already publicly stated that they fully disagree with Behe's opinions about Intelligent Design and "irreducible complexity", and that he does not speak for the university. It reflects more on the professional courtesy of Lehigh than it does the validity of Behe's position that they did not take his tenure away from him. Many would have understood if they had.
8. Even if this claim was true, it wouldn't increase the standing of creationism. Many scientists do, and would probably continue to, reject creationism.
9. add more responses

Fallacies contained in this claim

• Appeal to Authority (most scientists' expertise is irrelevant)
• Anonymous Authorities (no scientists are named)
• Unrepresentative Sample (US scientists, or scientists the claimant knows, are not representative)

External Links

• Mark Isaak's page for this claim [6]
• National Academy of Sciences, 1999. Science and Creationism. [7]
• NCSE, 2003. Project Steve, [8]
• Schafersman, Steven, 2003. Texas Citizens for Science Responds to Latest Discovery Institute Challenge. September 2, 2003 [9]

Related claims

• Evolution will soon be widely rejected
• Many scientists find problems with evolution
• Many famous scientists were creationists

See Also

• Why is Creationism not a Scientific Theory?

Acknowledgments

• Fang 23
• tk
• Amit