This question relates to the specific list formerly placed on the Answer to the related question, "Do any qualified scientists support the creation theory?" The list has been copied in large part from the website of Creation Ministries International, but may contain additional names. The original list appears now to have been copied to an extremely large number of sites across the web, and any attempt to list them all would quickly become out of date. The fact that the list appeared on WikiAnswers and such a large number of other websites makes it a matter of public interest to estimate the accuracy of the original list.
Some details collected by our community:
Kelvin and Romanes were not creationists. Other biologists have claimed that the statements made by these organizations that they signed were misleading and that attempts to get the organizations to remove their names from the list have been unanswered.
Several of the signers have also signed onto other unscientific lists, including one denying that HIV causes AIDS (for example, Phillip Johnson, Jonathan Wells and Tom Bethel).
There are differing opinions about the qualifications of the listed individuals. A number of names on the list, including the one presented on this site, are known to be presented inaccurately. The TalkOrigins Project Steve FAQ contains a number of examples of such.
Only about 0.15% of American biologists support creationism when asked via confidential survey; this strongly refutes the proposition that biologists who support creation keep their views quiet to avoid any backlash. Examples of such backlash for simply believing creationism are nonexistent (as shown on Expelled Exposed and at Talk Origins).
The question is whether those named on the list have qualifications such that lay people should give weight to their opinions in the creationism versus evolution debate. A spot check of a few names on the list, based on information widely available on the internet did not find any medical practitioners from the lists with PhDs in a science-related field or employed as scientists in the normal sense. The spot check also indicated that the following names are of people who do not appear to fulfil the normal requirements to be defined as scientists, although some may be leaders in other fields:
A project by the NCSE, Project Steve, has collected the signatures of over 880 scientists only named Steven, Stephen or another variant (of which about two thirds are biologists, unlike the creationist lists) who agree completely with the basic tenets of evolutionary Biology. As Steves represent only 1% of the population, this means that, at minimum, about 88,000 scientists would be expected to sign this statement, as compared to the about 500 (many of whom are dubious in their scientific credentials) who have signed the statements supporting creationism.
list the indian scientist with their inventions
list three things that the scientists learned about earth in the 1800's?
There are hundreds of lists if you go to wikipedia and search for a "list of scientist".
list four methods that modern mapmaker us to make accurate maps?
You have to list child support arrears as a debt and you have to list child support payments in the budget. Child support arrears cannot be discharged, however.
Prior to reading the answers below, it is perhaps important to note that there is no 'creation theory'. There are various religious creation myths, but no comprehensive and robust scientific model that has any explanatory or predictive power.Answer: Quite a few scientists support creation theory. This places them out of step with the mainstream scientists who believe in autobiogenesis, or a spontaneous origin of life, coupled with evolution. As Richard Dawkins put it "It is a monumental disagreement. One side or the other has got to be wrong, and not just slightly wrong but catastrophically, ignominiously, disastrously wrong."Prior to the 20th Century, most scientists believed in Creation.Today, there are numerous organizations of scientists who support creation theory: Answers in Genesis ; Creation Research, Science Education Foundation; Institute for Creation Research; The Creation SuperLibrary and others. Some publish peer-reviewed journals, such as the Creation Research Society's CRS Journal and the Journal of Creation by Creation Ministries International (The Australian arm of Answers in Genesis).Answer While it is true that many "scientists" disagree with evolution in favor of creationism, that number drops significantly when you consider only those who study nature or life, and is almost non-existent when you consider only those with expertise in fields like biology, paleontology, geology or astronomy - the above list may seem impressive, but it is out of well over a hundred thousand PhD scientists alive today. Now it's also important to note that many scientists believe in some sort of god or creator, but are not creationists. Creationism generally refers to strict 6-day creation fundamentalism or the movement to teach that there is a god in science classes in public schools. About 60% of scientists believe in a personal god, many believe this god created life indirectly, which can be considered a different sort of creationism. Meanwhile about 99.85% of earth and life scientists (those same scientists who mostly believe in a personal god) accept evolution as well.Answer Yes, quite a few actually. Many scientists and researchers have come to support the creation theory because as they study 'Creation -vs- Evolution' they have found that there are more 'holes' in the evolution theory than there are in 'Creation'.Both Creationism and Evolution start with presuppositions. Evolution starts with the presupposition that God, if He exists, played no part in the development of species, but that they developed by macro-evolution or chance mutations that resulted in benefit to the organisms; Creationism presumes that He created all species, and that there are minor adaptions which occur naturally, called micro-evolution.
Go to wikipedia and type list of scientist then click on list of scientist after thaty click on australian scientist. There will be tons of scientists that are male.
A list of every single scientist in the world would be nearly impossible to get, as there are millions of scientists worldwide in a number of fields, could you be more specific?