Creationists/Intelligent Design proponents have a long tradition of assembling lists of scientists who do not fully accept out outright deny natural selection in favor of creation. The point of theses list is generally to show the public that not all scientists accept natural selection, and to cause people to question the notion that there is a scientific consensus that natural selection is the mechanism by which living things have differences.
One such list can be found on the Answers in Genesis website, here. It is a list of what looks like a few hundred scientists.I guess they decided their list wasn’t impressive enough, so they also include a list of dead scientists who did not support evolution, including scientists who died before Dawin was born.
Obviously, science is not decided by which group of scientists has the longest list of supporters, but the folks over at the National Center for Science Education have decided to make their own list – a tongue-in-cheek one – of scientists who support evolution. The trick is that they made a list comprised only of people whose first name is Steve (or variations of Steve such as Steven). It’s called, aptly, Project Steve.
Population estimates claim that only about 1% of the population has a name such as this, so only 1% of scientists are allowed to add their name to this list. So far, there are 1072 Steves who support evolution. About 51% of the Steves are biologists, and the Steve list is considerably longer than the Answers in Genesis’ list.
Contact Ziztur at ZizturIsWrong at gmail dot com.
Follow Ziztur on Twitter
The list of “scientists against evolution” is pretty much demolished at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty1Bo6GmPqM&feature=channel_pageThe maker of the video contacted the scientists on the list connected with biological science (a minority of the total) and checked out whether they accepted common descent. The large majority of respondents did accept it, and some had previously asked to be removed from the list.
The list of “scientists against evolution” is pretty much demolished at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty1Bo6GmPqM&feature=channel_pageThe maker of the video contacted the scientists on the list connected with biological science (a minority of the total) and checked out whether they accepted common descent. The large majority of respondents did accept it, and some had previously asked to be removed from the list.
The list of “scientists against evolution” is pretty much demolished at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty1Bo6GmPqM&feature=channel_pageThe maker of the video contacted the scientists on the list connected with biological science (a minority of the total) and checked out whether they accepted common descent. The large majority of respondents did accept it, and some had previously asked to be removed from the list.
As a little thought experiment, I looked though one of those lists (I think it was the Discovery Institute’s) for people named Steve. I think there were four.Also, a computer programmer thinks he can compare DNA to computer code. < HREF="http://runolfr.blogspot.com/2009/03/incompetent-design-am-i-refuted.html" REL="nofollow">I think he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.<>
Edit: The video refers to the DI list, rather than the AIG list (although I think Project Steve was set up to counter the DI list). The AIG list seems to share some of the same problems though, like large numbers of scientists in fields unrelated to evolution.
As a little thought experiment, I looked though one of those lists (I think it was the Discovery Institute’s) for people named Steve. I think there were four.Also, a computer programmer thinks he can compare DNA to computer code. < HREF="http://runolfr.blogspot.com/2009/03/incompetent-design-am-i-refuted.html" REL="nofollow">I think he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.<>
Edit: The video refers to the DI list, rather than the AIG list (although I think Project Steve was set up to counter the DI list). The AIG list seems to share some of the same problems though, like large numbers of scientists in fields unrelated to evolution.
As a little thought experiment, I looked though one of those lists (I think it was the Discovery Institute’s) for people named Steve. I think there were four.Also, a computer programmer thinks he can compare DNA to computer code. < HREF="http://runolfr.blogspot.com/2009/03/incompetent-design-am-i-refuted.html" REL="nofollow">I think he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.<>
Edit: The video refers to the DI list, rather than the AIG list (although I think Project Steve was set up to counter the DI list). The AIG list seems to share some of the same problems though, like large numbers of scientists in fields unrelated to evolution.
By my count, the Answers in Genesis list contains three (3) scientists named Steve. Compared to the 1000+ names in Project Steve . . .If this is an even vaguely represenative sample, we have a small fraction of 1% of the scientific community that does not accept any evidence for the theory of evolution. This places the theories (a term I use <><>very<><> loosely, here) of Biblical Creationism and Intelligent Design squarely in the ‘crackpot’ category.Even this analysis is charitable enough to assume that all the names on AiG’s list belong there, which is <><>spectacularly<><> forgiving. Consider that I happened to notice that the list contains Henry M. Morris, the founder of the Institute for Creation Research(!). The list even <><>specifies<><> his only scientific credentials as being the founder of ICR!
By my count, the Answers in Genesis list contains three (3) scientists named Steve. Compared to the 1000+ names in Project Steve . . .If this is an even vaguely represenative sample, we have a small fraction of 1% of the scientific community that does not accept any evidence for the theory of evolution. This places the theories (a term I use <><>very<><> loosely, here) of Biblical Creationism and Intelligent Design squarely in the ‘crackpot’ category.Even this analysis is charitable enough to assume that all the names on AiG’s list belong there, which is <><>spectacularly<><> forgiving. Consider that I happened to notice that the list contains Henry M. Morris, the founder of the Institute for Creation Research(!). The list even <><>specifies<><> his only scientific credentials as being the founder of ICR!
By my count, the Answers in Genesis list contains three (3) scientists named Steve. Compared to the 1000+ names in Project Steve . . .If this is an even vaguely represenative sample, we have a small fraction of 1% of the scientific community that does not accept any evidence for the theory of evolution. This places the theories (a term I use <><>very<><> loosely, here) of Biblical Creationism and Intelligent Design squarely in the ‘crackpot’ category.Even this analysis is charitable enough to assume that all the names on AiG’s list belong there, which is <><>spectacularly<><> forgiving. Consider that I happened to notice that the list contains Henry M. Morris, the founder of the Institute for Creation Research(!). The list even <><>specifies<><> his only scientific credentials as being the founder of ICR!