Of course I know none personally, but there are probably quite a few. The odds are greatly against all biologists accepting the theory of evolution.
About 100x as many biologists who have studied the data do accept evolution, and they comprise multiple religions as well as agnostics and atheists.
So how about you??? can you back up this claim? And why am I surprised that agnostics and atheists choose to trust evolutionary theory??
I recall hearing of debates between creationists and evolutionists in which creationists were more convincing. I wish I could point to some as proof, but I can't. If that is true, what would you make of it?
I didn't say that they did, but I contend that around 99% of them do. In evidence look at professional publications (as opposed to websites and pop-science books). Creationists and ID supporters are virtually invisible in peer-reviewed publications.
And why am I surprised that agnostics and atheists choose to trust evolutionary theory??
Not at all, but as I said plenty of religious people also trust ToE, yet the opposition to ToE is almost entirely religious.
I recall hearing of debates between creationists and evolutionists in which creationists were more convincing. I wish I could point to some as proof, but I can't. If that is true, what would you make of it?
What I would make of it as that some creationists are adept at presenting convincing sounding arguments to non-experts. When I look at websites like AiG and ICR (basically full of lies and misinformation) and the output of people like Behe and Dembski I see work that is almost entirely targeted at convincing lay people, not the scientific community. Creationists and ID'ers try to end-run round the normal scientific process of observation/experimentation/peer-review/publication. I believe this is because scientifically their arguments are largely free of substance.