MM,
Great list. Is that all you've got? A hundred or so guys who supposedly disagree with evolutionary science? Maybe someday I'll go through your list and pick out all the bible college guys, non biologists, and liars. You'll be down to just a few. In the meantime, in the spirit of your little game, here's 300 PhD's (most in biological fields) who happen to use evolutionary theory in their work. (ie, "believe" in your vernacular):
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3697_the_list_2_16_2003.asp Only 300? read on...
NCSE Project Steve
NCSE's "Project Steve" is a tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of "scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from Darwinism." (For examples of such lists, see the FAQs.)
Creationists draw up these lists to convince the public that evolution is somehow being rejected by scientists, that it is a "theory in crisis." Most members of the public lack sufficient contact with the scientific community to know that this claim is totally unfounded. NCSE has been exhorted by its members to compile a list of thousands of scientists affirming the validity of the theory of evolution, but although we easily could have done so, we have resisted such pressure. We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!
Project Steve mocks this practice with a bit of humor, and because "Steves" are only about 1% of scientists, it incidentally makes the point that tens of thousands of scientists support evolution. And it honors the late Stephen Jay Gould, NCSE supporter and friend.
We'd like to think that after Project Steve, we'll have seen the last of bogus "scientists doubting evolution" lists, but it's probably too much to ask. We do hope that at least when such lists are proposed, reporters and other citizens will ask, "but how many Steves are on your list!?"
The statement reads:
Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools.
Ok, I bit. Despite the fact that your list of "dissenters" is useless, I checked on a couple guys. The first guy (schaeffer) accepts evolution, but not all of it. Fair enough for a Physical Chemist.
The 2nd guy (Higworth) is interesting. I know him (indirectly) and I've forwarded your link on to him for his response. I'll keep you posted.
..skipped a couple..
We all know Behe. He's a professor of BioChem, not biology per se, but that's a mere quibble. His personal agenda ($$) is well known and makes him look silly. Scientists don't report findings in mass market books. They do it in peer reviewed journals.
The last guy I checked was Hearn (Ph.D. in biochemistry, University of Illinois). Impressive. However, currently he
is professor of science and Christianity at New College for Advanced Christian Studies in Berkeley, California.
Moot point? It would be if your Adobe file didn't include this interesting caveat at the bottom: "Scientists listed by doctoral degree or current position." In Hearn's case, I think the choice for them to print was fairly obvious.
No need for the Steve's to engage in such duplicity.