What percentage of professional scientists believe in evolution?

Question

Please, cite your sources. Preferably they be from respectable scientific sites or they be news articles, or something to the like. Thanks!

Answer 1

95%, and higher in the apllicable sciences (biology, geology, anthropology). A signific portion believe in theistic evolution, where God plays a role. The survey has an error of ±3%.

Answer 2

"Dr." Kent Hovind is sweet at rhetoric. some Dude's style, ninety 5% is sweet. A November 1997 Gallup survey of scientists got here upon 5% of scientists believe in Creationism, 40% believe in Theistic Evolution, and fifty 5% believe in Naturalistic Evolution. save in ideas, Kent Hovind lives for deceit and data advise not some thing to him if he can not distort them.

Answer 3

"As reported in Newsweek magazine, 29 June 1987, Page 23: "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..." "

in the reference section of the article.

Answer 4

None. Professional scientists do not "believe" in evolution; they accept it as a hypothesis that is best supported by evidence.

Answer 5

Although I can't site sources like you asked, I read a couple of months ago that leading scientist have long ago recognized the flaws in the evolution theory that humans and other primates at one time had a common ancestor.
I ask you to just think for a second about this: Assume humans did evolve from a common ancestor, then why have we not evolved in recorded history? Other species, like the lemur in Madagascar has evolved into over 50 species in the last 20 years. Species, by definition, is when two of that species can mate and has offspring that can also mate. Lemurs, in the past twenty years, have adapted to their specific habitats so much that they can no longer mate with other lemurs in different parts of the island of Madagascar. (This is information from my biology professor who has written several books on the topic. ) Lemurs are relatively isolated in their respective parts of the island. Humans, in the past, have been far more isolated. For example, first nation groups in North and South America were extreme isolated from outside genes. Conditions would have been perfect for an evolution of the species. They were isolated from other gene pools and those with unfavorable traits were unlikely to have offspring. However, we have found no evidence that they evolved from sub human to human or from human to something more. Even to this day there are native groups in Brazil, Nepal, and China that have had absolutely no outside gene influence for over a thousand years and yet they are still humans. First nation groups were isolated for at least two hundred years and maybe longer. If humans can/did evolve, like the lemur, then first nation groups in the Americas should have, but they didn’t.
This is the story of the human. Throughout history the animals around us have evolved and we create laws and theories based on these patterns, but humans have escaped every chance to evolve. This is not to say we haven’t adapted or changed, we just have not turned into different species. Even in the signs we see of the earliest humans that are thousands of years old, they were still human. Prehistoric cave paintings exhibit striking human characteristics, like humor. Humor is strictly a human quality and we can see this sign of humanity in the earliest signs of human existence.

Answer 6

See:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA111.html

Less 5% of all scientists, and less than 0.15% of relevant (biology-related) scientists believe in creationism.

Answer 7

well, among various hypotheses of the world ,organisms and its formation, this is the most credible one with evidences.
So, it depends on their believes but this is, up to this moment, the most realistic hypothesis!