Intelligent Design

[Esquilax]

There is almost no consensus about anything in science. The theory of evolution is one of the most attacked theories in the history of science.

But not by scientists: the Pew research center pegged acceptance of evolution among the scientific community at 97%, and even as far back as 1987 studies could only find 700 scientists (out of an estimated 480,000) who didn't accept the theory. No, evolution is an attacked theory because of ideologues with no training in relevant fields; those with the expertise don't generally attack evolution, and in fact acceptance of evolution scales with levels of education.

It isn't solely due to the philosophical implications either. That's part of it, but when they attack it with evidence, the criticisms can't be dismissed. People who attack the theory are labeled as not being real scientists. If the ones who accept the theory are the only people you consider real biologists, then of course all of the biologists agree. Because those that don't agree are not real biologists right?

There's barely any actual biologists who don't accept evolution, which should at least prompt you to ask the questions: why is it that the majority accepts evolution? And why am I following the vanishingly small minority... while still attempting to leverage their credibility as biologists to give their contentions more weight?

Seriously, you don't see a problem with that?