Evolutionists often have come forth and admitted their own and their colleagues' extreme degree of bias in this matter. Some have admitted that their approach has not been scientific or objective at all. Many admit to the severe lack of evidence for evolution and that they have accepted their conclusions only because they are unwilling to accept that evolution never occurred. (And other final considerations.)

1. "Paleontologists seem to have thought it their duty to protect the rest of us from the erroneous conclusions we might have drawn if we had known the actual state of the evidence." ([11], p.59)
2. "We (evolutionists) have been telling our students for years not to accept any statement on its face value but to examine the evidence, and, therefore, it is rather a shock to discover that we have failed to follow our own sound advice." John T, Bonner ([19], p.91)
3. "We Paleontologists have said that the history of life supports (the story of gradual adaptive change), all the while really knowing that it does not." Miles Eldredge, pro-evolution ([11], p.59)
4. "...the philosophy of evolution is based upon assumptions that cannot be scientifically verified...whatever evidence can be assembled for evolution is both limited and circumstantial in nature." G.A. Kerkut, pro-evolution ([4], p.363)
5. "(the record of reckless speculation of human origins) is so astonishing that it is legitimate to ask whether much science is yet to be found in this field at all." Solly Zuckerman ([11], p.82)
6. "In other words, while Osborn, Gregory, and their colleagues considered themselves to have written scientific analysis of human evolution, they had in fact been telling stories (fiction). Scientific stories to be sure, but stories nonetheless." Misia Landau, paraphrase ([14], p.32)
7. "The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone." T.L. Moor, pro-evolution ([22], p.22)
8. "We cannot disprove that it (the universe) was created in 4004 B.C...." George Simpson, pro-evolution
9. "...objective examination has rarely been the object of Darwinist paleontology. The Darwinist approach has consistently been to find some supporting fossil evidence, claim it as `proof' for `evolution', and then ignore all the difficulties." ([11], p.84)
10. "It is, in fact, a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictate conclusions." "Data are just as often molded to fit preferred conclusions." Roger Lewin, pro-evolutionist ([14], p.68)
11. "I have come to believe that many statements we make about the how and whys of human evolution say as much about us, the paleoanthropologists and the larger society in which we live, as about anything that really happened." David Pilbeam, pro-evolution ([14], p.85)
12. "We do not see things the way they are; we see them the way we are." David Pilbeam, pro-evolution ([5], p.?)
13. "...in my own subject of paleoanthropology, `theory' heavily influenced by implicit ideas (assumptions) almost always dominates `data'...Ideas that are totally unrelated to actual fossils have dominated theory building, which in turn strongly influences the way fossils are interpreted." David Pilbeam, pro-evolution ([14], p.127)
14. "Racism, as we would characterize it today, was explicit in the writings of virtually all the major anthropologists of the first century, simply because it was the generally accepted view." ([14], p.307)
15. We must note then that when Darwin wrote his paper, Origin of Species, he had no skulls, his contemporaries were filled with racism as they tried to find the less than humans, and his Co-founder, Wallace, decided against the theory.
16. "The problem is that because we know the `end of the story' (that evolution is true), we tend to interpret earlier events as if their sole purpose was to reach that end." Roger Lewin, pro-evolution ([15], p.22)
17. "Evolution itself is accepted by zoologists, not because it has been observed to occur or can be proved by logical coherent evidence, but because the only alternative -- special creation -- is clearly incredible." D.M.S. Watson ([22], p.22)
18. "Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation which is unthinkable." Arthur Keith ([22], p.22)
19. "...there is an important difference between going to the empirical evidence to test a doubtful theory against some plausible alternative, and going to the evidence to look for confirmation of the only theory that one is willing to tolerate." ([11], p.28)
20. "This situation, where men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science." W.R.Thompson, pro-evolution, in his introduction to Origin of Species by Darwin. ([19], p.90)
21. "...with human origins, each generations explanation appears to contain expository themes that go well beyond what might be implied by the new scientific information of the time." ([11], p.312) "...ideas about human origins turn out on closer examination to tell us as much about the present as about the past, as much about our own experiences as about those of our remote ancestors." Evolutionist John Durant ([11], p.312)
22. "...the only reason why most people seem to believe in evolution is either because they want to believe in it or else because they have been cowed into accepting it out of fear of being called ignorant or reactionary or some such fearful name." ([19], p.92)
23. "The incessant repetition of this unproved claim glossing lightly over the difficulties, and the assumption of an arrogant attitude toward those who are not easily swayed by fashions of science, are considered to afford scientific proof of the doctrine." Richard Goldschmidt, geneticist. ([24], p.21)
24. "The charge of circular reasoning which has been lodged against the critically important paleontological evidence of evolution is not simply to be laughed off or ignored as evolutionists too commonly attempt to do. It quite plainly involves the presupposition of evolution, with numerous involved deductions based on that premise. It is not, therefore, valid to offer this presupposition and these deductions as proof of evolution, and especially in view of the tremendously important fact that there is no real evidence of present evolution." ([19], p.55)
25. The supposed division of the continents, Africa and South America, cannot be considered as having happened since the earth's land cannot be reconstructed to truly fit together in any orderly way. "Recent investigators have used computers to try to fit the continents. But even one of the reconstructions of how Africa, South America, Europe, and North America once fitted together has areas of overlap between these continents, and Central America is omitted altogether." ([7], p.)
26. One must realize that a resemblance of a near fit does not make two things to have been together once in the past. Such would be a logical fallacy.
27. There were once considered to be 180 vestigial organs (organs of no use that evolutionists use to say we evolved out of). Today, there are medically regarded as being no vestigial organs. For example, the appendix is noted as able to fight infection in early life and tonsils destroy harmful bacteria. ([4], p.112)
28. It was once thought that `...an organism was assumed to pass through the stages of its evolutionary history during its development as an embryo." "(This) has been thoroughly discredited by scientists today." ([4], p.354 4) What as thought to be `gill slits' is actually the formation of the middle ear canal, jaw, and parts of the head and neck. ([22], p.23). The coccyx, once regarded as a literal tail bone, is now known to be a muscle attachment in the embryo and as providing support to the pelvic region in the fully developed bodies.
29. Darwin: "I have asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a fantasy." "I...am ready to cry with vexation at my blindness and presumption." ([23], p.59)
30. "And when we examine the respective evidences still more closely...we shall find that there are almost insuperable difficulties with the evolutionary explanation of each of the different evidences. They can all be understood much better in terms of special creation than in terms of evolution." ([18], p.19)
31. "If there are so many problems with Darwinism and no satisfactory alternative within the framework of evolution, why not reevaluate the framework?" ([11], p.62)
32. "Why not consider the possibility that life is what it so evidently seems to be, the product of creative intelligence? Science would not come to an end, because the task would remain of deciphering the languages in which genetic information is communicated, and in general finding out how the whole system works. What scientists would lose is not an inspiring research program, but the illusion of total mastery of nature. They would have to face the possibility that beyond the natural world there is a further reality which transcends science." ([11], p.110)