Are only 700 out of 480,000 life scientists creationists?

Question

I've seen this claim stated in many places, for example the talk.origins FAQ:

Of the scientists and engineers in the United States, only about 5% are creationists, according to a 1991 Gallup poll (Robinson 1995, Witham 1997). However, this number includes those working in fields not related to life origins (such as computer scientists, mechanical engineers, etc.). Taking into account only those working in the relevant fields of earth and life sciences, there are about 480,000 scientists, but only about 700 believe in "creation-science" or consider it a valid theory (Robinson 1995). This means that less than 0.15 percent of relevant scientists believe in creationism. And that is just in the United States, which has more creationists than any other industrialized country. In other countries, the number of relevant scientists who accept creationism drops to less than one tenth of 1 percent.

Original source: Newsweek?

Now, with some source-hopping I found the source of the claim to be a magazine article:
Larry Martz & Ann McDaniel, "Keeping God Out of Class (Washington and bureau reports)". Newsweek (Newsweek Inc.) 1987-JUN-29, Pages 22 & 23. ISSN 0028-9604.

I don't know if this is the original source, or if it refers to a scientific study. I'd like to know that.

Quote from the Newsweek article

Wikipedia also makes a reference to the Newsweek article in question. They have a footnote quoting Newsweek:

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 general theory that complex life forms did not evolve but appeared 'abruptly'.

Now, I can't get my hands on the Newsweek article in question. However, it sounds to me that there's one magazine article from 1987 that talks about "one count" without references. And this gets cited all around the web.

The questions

Does the Newsweek article say any more about this count? Is there some proper research behind the claim, and if so, what are the methods for counting? Is the fraction of creationists in life scientists in the US really only 0.15%?

---

^{I say only because using a source talk.origins used, too, in 1997 a full 44% of American adults believed in creationism. Of all scientists, the amount was 5%. I'm used to seeing figures like these, so 0.15% for a specific group of scientists seems very little. However, if only is offensive to some and removed again, I'm not going to argue.}

Answer 1

The Newsweek article which appears to be the ultimate source of this quote does not seem to give any explanation of where the figure comes from. Here's the whole paragraph:

Changing strategy: In the Louisiana case, the fundamentalist forces had seemed on the best legal ground since the famous "monkey trial" of 1925, when biology teacher John Scopes was convicted of teaching evolution in Tennessee. That outcome was overturned on a technicality, but Clarence Darrow's humiliating grilling of the fundamentalist William Jennings Bryan effectively beat back the anti-evolution cause for years. In the 1970s, however, the fundamentalists devloped a new strategy; to establish the Biblical account of creation as a respectable scientific theory and demand equal time for its teaching. By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientist) who give credence to creation-science, the general theory that complex life forms did not evolve but appeared "abruptly." The first state law demanding equal time for this notion, in Arkansas, was struck down by a federal court as a transparent promotion of religion. But in Louisiana Keith's bill was carefully tailored to omit religious overtones, and it had a specific secular purpose: to promote academic freedom by ensuring that all sides are taught.

"By one count" is one of those phrases articles use when they really aren't very sure about the provenance and accuracy of the figure. That's not to say the figure has no value at all. But it shouldn't be taken as an accurate figure, and certainly not be as frequently quoted on the web as it appears to be.

The quote is certainly nothing to do with the 700 signatories on the Discovery Institute's widely criticised "Dissent from Darwin list. The quote is from 1987 and the Dissent from Darwin list started in 2001.

Answer 2

700 scientists is quite likely an over-estimation.

The Discovery Institute can only be described as a pro-creation, anti-Evolution think-tank.

Started in 1996, the Center for Science and Culture is a Discovery Institute program which:

• supports research by scientists and other scholars challenging various aspects of neo-Darwinian theory;
• supports research by scientists and other scholars developing the scientific theory known as intelligent design;
• supports research by scientists and scholars in the social sciences and humanities exploring the impact of scientific materialism on culture.
• encourages schools to improve science education by teaching students more fully about the theory of evolution, including the theory's scientific weaknesses as well is its strengths.

They run a petition for scientists to publicly express their doubts against evolution.

Now:

• The Institute is farily well known among creationists;
• The Institute is openly biased towards creationism (it has interest in showing a number of scientists which is as large as possible);
• The petition is open to scientists from all over the world (not only the US);
• The petition is open to any kind of scientist (not only from related fields)

So one would expect that the numbers of these petition are certain to be much larger than the life-scientists who support creationism in the US.

How many signatories do they have?

700

Now, is it sustainable that there are thousands or tens of thousands of creationist scientists, and yet their most notable institute can only muster 700 signatures? It seems completely unrealistic.

So while this doesn't prove the point, it is strong evidence. Nothing proves the point because that would be actually debating what people believe and we can't do that skeptically.

What we can say for certain is that only at most 700 scientist bothered signing this notable petition. You'll be the judge if their overall number can be far off.

What are the possible reasons for this number being so low?

• There is overwhelming scientific support for evolution. The empirical proof is super-solid and extensive. People in the sector will be exposed to it.
• There is a strict correlation between level of literacy and disbelief in creationism. E.g. see this 2010 Gallup poll.

  Americans' views on human origins vary significantly by level of education and religiosity. Those who are less educated are more likely to hold a creationist view. Those with college degrees and postgraduate education are more likely to hold one of the two viewpoints involving evolution.

---

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution

Answer 3

We don't know. The claim made by Newsweek is unreliable.

This is only a partial answer. It only addresses the specific claim made in Newsweek on June 29, 1987, cited by some others. It doesn't address the actual number of creationism-supporting life scientists.

After showing this question to some friends, I got access to the Newsweek article (behind a paywall). The article is about the debate on creation "science" in public education.

The electronic version makes no reference to outside sources*. The full paragraph including the 700/480,000 figure is as follows:

Changing strategy: In the Louisiana case, the fundamentalist forces had seemed on the best legal ground since the famous "monkey trial" of 1925, when biology teacher John Scopes was convicted of teaching evolution in Tennessee. That outcome was overturned on a technicality, but Clarence Darrow's humiliating grilling of the fundamentalist William Jennings Bryan effectively beat back the anti-evolution cause for years. In the 1970s, however, the fundamentalists devloped a new strategy; to establish the Biblical account of creation as a respectable scientific theory and demand equal time for its teaching. By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientist) who give credence to creation-science, the general theory that complex life forms did not evolve but appeared "abruptly." The first state law demanding equal time for this notion, in Arkansas, was struck down by a federal court as a transparent promotion of religion. But in Louisiana Keith's bill was carefully tailored to omit religious overtones, and it had a specific secular purpose: to promote academic freedom by ensuring that all sides are taught.

As there's no mention on who did the counting and how, the specific claim made by Newsweek has no known scientific basis.

* _{It's conceivable but improbable that the physical magazine has content the online (text-only) version doesn't.}

Answer 4

The full Newsweek article is available over at: http://rsr.org/newsweek-1987

As a creationist, I asked the article's authors, Larry Martz and Ann McDaniel, for information on that statistic. The statistic is invalid as their replies and the information at that link should make obvious.

In 1987 Martz & McDaniel wrote,

"By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientist) who give credence to creation-science, the general theory that complex life forms did not evolve but appeared "abruptly."

To a request for more details, on June 12, 2012 Ann McDaniel replied to Real Science Radio:

"Bob – I wish I had the notes for that story, but I don’t have everything from 25 years ago, and I don’t remember. So sorry that I cannot help you."

On April 1, 2013 Larry Martz wrote,

"Mr. Enyart, ... I was the New York writer on this story, working from reports from Ann McDaniel and others who weren't named in the byline, along with whatever telephone reporting I did myself. I don't remember which of them came up with that figure, or what its provenance was. It might well have been Ginny Carroll, who was Newsweek's principal reporter on Christian religious affairs; but sad to say, Ginny is dead. Your conjecture seems entirely reasonable, but none of us can confirm it... I think you are probably safe to use your conjecture for the source, along with 'probably.' best, larry martz".

Bob Enyart also spoke with Glen Wolfram, the CRS membership director who has served in that position since the 1980s. Wolfram agreed with Enyart's conclusion that Newsweek was likely referring to the publicly known number of scientist members of CRS. He provided published membership records from throughout the 1980s. Over the five years from mid-1982 to mid-1987, the average CRS membership was about 2,000 with 36 percent being voting members, that is, having earned a postgraduate science degree. So there were an average of 710 "scientists with respectable academic credentials" as members of CRS in the years leading up to that Newsweek article, which number was undoubtedly the source for that 1987 report.

The late Roger Ebert may have been remembering the fabricated claim that nearly 100% of scientists reject design when he put the percent at "99.975". As for the 99.86, that percentage was, possibly unintentionally, arrived at by some who incorrectly calculated a percentage based on the "count". So Real Science Radio hereby ask evolutionists to help us creationists by correcting anyone who still promotes that incorrect 99.86%. Thanks!