Only 0.15% of Biologists and Geologists Are Creationists
 from The Evolution Evidence Page


According to Newsweek in 1987, "By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who give credence to creation-science..."

The above is quoted from Public Beliefs About Evolution And Creation at ReligiousTolerance.org.  which in turn referenced Newsweek magazine, 1987-JUN-29, Page 23 as the source for this data.

700  U.S. earth or life scientists who accept creationism / 480,000 U.S. earth or life  scientists X 100%
=  0.15% of U.S. earth or life scientists that accept creationism.

I think this is a good statistic to give some kind of an indication of just how far out of the mainstream creationists are. It's a good rebuttal to the lists of Creation Scientists that are trotted out from time to time by creationists to give the impression that there is something other than a miniscule fraction of scientists that share their beliefs. Project Steve from the National Center for Science Education is also a good answer to this (because there are more scientists with names that are a variation of Steve that accept evolution than there are creation scientists on any of the lists that I have seen), but I would rather be able to say that there are about 9985 biologists or geologists who accept evolution for every 15 biologists or geologists that believe in creationism. Note that even if the count of creation scientists was off by a factor of 10, an overwhelming 99.85% of biologists and geoligists would still be in the rejecting creationism category.

I realise that this is not a case of majority rules, but any reasonable person should be able to see that evolution (and presumably a multi-billion year age of the earth) is accepted by an overwhelming majority of the people who know the most about the topic. If creationists expect any kind of increased acceptance of their beliefs in the scientific community, they had better start publishing data to support it in the peer reviewed scientifc journals where it can be evaluated and discussed by the scientific community.

Or, they could just present their ideas to the (mostly) science illiterate public and give up on trying to convince the scientific community. A little thought on this topic makes it easy to see why creationists have chosen this route (along with the fact that the scientific community DID evaluate the beliefs of creationism about 100 years ago (and farther back) and a great majority (apparently 99.85% of biologists and geologists at the current time) found that creationism was NOT supported by the evidence).