A 20 year resident of Arizona, I have also seen many fossils which are out of place.Ã‚Â The Grand Canyon, one of the most accesible diplays of the multilayers, offers many.
Ã‚Â Your signature cites that 99.9% of biologists accept evolution.Ã‚Â In 5 minutes I found several sites with different studies indicating hundreds of scientists do not believe evolution has the answers.Ã‚Â Most of those studies noted a number of biologists within the group ad I am guessing the remainder included some as well because biology is such an intricate part of the studies.Ã‚Â Maybe all those hundreds only amount to .1%.Ã‚Â I sorta doubt it, but could be.
Ã‚Â I also have to wonder how many there might be that just go with the flow, cautious of their future employment.Ã‚Â Admitidly that is uncountable and unknowable.Ã‚Â Could be just me hoping.Ã‚Â So irrellevent.Ã‚Â But I leave it here anyway.
Ã‚Â For debate's sake I'll assume you can prove your 99.9%.Ã‚Â At differing points in history 100% of scientists (including some biologists, I'd guess) believed travelling faster than a horse could carry you would rip your skin from your skeleton because of the air flow; Humans are at differing levels of evolution (intelligence etc.) and this could be indicated by skin tone; the world was flat; The Earth was the center of the universe and all rotated around us.Ã‚Â I think that is enough.Ã‚Â The number of people believing in X does not make X true, just popular.
I'd be curious to see these lists of biologists, because if it's the ones I think you're talking about.... Well, we'll see.
Travelling faster than a horse could carry you would rip your skin off your skeleton? i'd be interested to see what time period that came from. I'm thinking pre-Rome. Also, the fact that you mention 100% of them believe that tells me that you actually aren't that sure.
Humans are at differing levels due to skin tone? Well, DNA evidence (which supports evolution by the way) shows that all humans are over 99% genetically similar, and Darwin himself was staunchly against slavery, and was remarkably accepting of other races for his time.
Scientists thought the world was flat? Perhaps, and that was a reasonable assumption at that point in time. Look at the horizon. It's flat. Only when ships went around the world was that disproved, and it was quickly scientifically accepted. Religious groups felt the same way about a flat earth, and that the Bible describes as a circle (as opposed to a sphere), I am not surprised.
The earth as the center of the universe supported by science? Ever heard of Galileo Galilei? He was the first scientist to prove through research that the earth was not the center of the universe (although first proposed by Copernicus). Galileo's work was censored by the church, who forced him to renounce his groundbreaking work, and kept him under house arrest to the end of his days. His works later garnered praise from the likes of sir Isaac Newton, and Albert Einstein.
His work ran opposed to this: Psalm 104:5 (King James Version): "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever."
The number of people believing in X does not make X true, just popular.
And you are absolutely right, when dealing with the general population. But when the people believing it are experts in the field, and have devoted their entire lives to the study of said field, it garners a great deal more credibility.