well RF?

Do you mean this poll?

1. Are you aware of any scientifically valid evidence or an alternate scientific theory that challenges the fundamental principles of the theory of evolution?
1. Yes -- 4%
2. No -- 93
3. Not Sure -- 2


2. The concept of “Intelligent Design” is that life and the universe are too complex to have developed without the intervention of a purposeful being or force to guide the development of life. Which of the following do you think best describes “Intelligent Design”?
1. It is strongly supported by scientific evidence -- 2%
2. It is partly supported by scientific evidence -- 5 
3. It is not supported at all by scientific evidence -- 90
4. Not Sure -- 3


3. Do you think the concept of “Intelligent Design” is primarily a religious view?”
1. Yes -- 91%
2. No -- 5
3. Not Sure -- 4


4. Do you think Ohio high school students should be tested on their understanding of the basic principles of the theory of evolution in order to graduate?
1. Yes -- 92%
2. No -- 4
3. Not Sure -- 3


5. Do you think Ohio high school students should be tested on their knowledge of the concept of “Intelligent Design” in order to graduate?
1. Yes -- 6%
2. No -- 90
3. Not Sure -- 4


6. Do you use the concept of Intelligent Design in your research?
1. Yes -- 2%
2. No -- 97
Not Sure -- 1


7. Do you think accepting the theory of evolution is consistent with believing in God?
a. Yes -- 84%
b. No -- 9
c. Not Sure -- 7


http://www.natcenscied.org/resources/articles/733_ohio_scientists39_intellige_10_15_2002.asp

I don't see where it says 72% are skeptical, I see where it says that 90% say ID is a crock.

Yes, make all the assertion s you want. It's all a great conspiracy!

I would have been more believing if you source had been a little more neutral Barnes...

The truth is, there aren't many polls about this. Most deal with the general population, or a large umbrella of peope called scientists, but in many different fields, expertise, ability and knowledge.  For example, a sociologist is a scientist, but why would he know about evolutionary biology? Or a chemical engineer, for that matter?

The irony is that it doesn't matter. The amount of people believing one hing or another is poor evidence for its truth.  Plus, RF has also commented that the high number of Atheists, or anti-IDists in science is a testament to the closed door policy they have towards religious people.

This of course is ridiculous, but it helps RF to believe this.  So, it is odd that he even brings this up.
If 80% of scientists are Xian and don't believe ID, he'll blame in on the "don't speak, don't tell policy". If 20% are xian, He'll cry bigotry.

Only until scientists become Xian ID'ists will he be happy, and all the polls, despite their focus, are NOT trending that way.

So, everyone can go and get a poll and we can look at it critically to see what the general scientific consensus is, or we can read what their official statement is.  (The NAS, and a vast majority of science organizations flatly deny ID is a science.)

Or, we can compare the science to ID, which RF refuses to on other forums where peope might actual know more.

I think the only strategy is to invite them here.

Yes, it's all a big conspiracy!

I notice that you accept polls that support your conclusion but reject those that challenge it. You are not even trying to maintain a veneer of impartiality.

RF, the polls indicate that scientists are less theistic, and that they reject ID/Creationism.  And the NAS the standard in scientific excellence - NOT the Discovery Institute.

I wish, RF, that you would be honest about your role in spreading propaganda for Creationism, at least to yourself.

I expect no other response from you. I know you would never admit that you work for the DI, and are a warrior for Jesus, like Paul - the lying bastard.