List of Scientists Rejecting Evolution- Do they really?

We have all seen the Discovery Institutes list of scientists rejecting evolution. I analyzed the list, and emailed its signees. The truth of the matter is, DI lied repeatedly when constructing the list, and, by their own admission, even IF the numbers are skewed hugely in favor or the creationists, this still leaves .0027% of scientists in the US rejecting evolution.

Updates will be added periodically as I hear from these scientists.

Update #1) - Heard about Marko Horb. This is an email I just received from the head of the dept. where he was listed as working:

"Dear Whitney

I have been away on leave so have only just found your email.

I'm afraid I've never heard of Marko Horb. How is he connected to the University?

Best wishes

Gill

Gill Smith
Communications Officer
Department of Corporate Communications
University of Bath
BA2 7AY"

#2) Dr David A. DeWitt received a B.S. in biochemistry from Michigan State University and a Ph.D. in neuroscience from Case Western Reserve University. I was mistaken when I said "I think undergrad".

#3) The figure I gave in the video is not intended to be used as a concrete % of scientists who reject evolution. Although it is close, I will specifically address this in my next video. That calculation was added moreso for amusement.

US DOL Link: http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes190...
http://www.bls.gov/oes/2005/may/physi...
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos066.htm#na...

DI List Link- http://www.reviewevolution.com/press/...

• Category

  Science & Technology

[Ibunshi]

I like how +500 people felt a need they had to hit the dislike button... i bet it must feel personally uncomfortable to hear truths, if one really just wants to believe something that isn't..

[Ibunshi]

this creationist is making a good example of something here....science does indeed ask for evidence and does indeed accept the burden of proof.. but, creationists seems to just wants to appear rational and "scientific" ..they ask questions, but ignore the answers, they make claims, but refuse to accept the burden of proof that comes with the claims..and so all you get is a shallow display of 'wanting to find answers' that only ever fool other creationists, or people with a set religious bias.

[pepe le moko]

great video, fantastic research

[David N]

sounds like pattle pun was hurting for crack did he try to sell you his tv laso?

[David N]

DOES .0027% = 2

[8Maik]

YES, you will find your answer i nthis video. /watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg

[Tom Tucker]

Answer mine: provide a better theory which satisfies the scientific method. It needs testable hypotheses and at least one criteria for falsifiability.

[5tonyvvvv]

The designing and engineering of genetic biochemical systems in the lab, it always requires very intelligent agents (Chemists)...Show genetic information forming on its own? So abiogenesis is a proven observable fact of chemistry? Answer my questions!!