Bandwagon Trick
If you cite that experts agree on a topic, and particularly if you cite the percentage that agree, apologists will often claim that this is just a bandwagon fallacy. They do this to confuse and deflect the argument, but their claim is not valid:
The Bandwagon Fallacy refers to citing a general public opinion, and not about citing experts.
Typical Scenario
Freethinker: 99% of all biologists -- the people who are experts in how life works -- agree that evolution is the best explanation for the variety of life on earth.
Apologist: A majority does not prove anything, only that many have that opinion. The sun orbits the earth, heavy objects fall faster than light objects and others show the majority is also wrong at times.
The Bandwagon Fallacy
There is a principle known as the "bandwagon fallacy" that says that a popular idea is not necessarily a true idea. That is, if the typical (non-expert) crowd believe a thing, that opinion is not relevant because they are not experts.
From ancient times up until the 20th century the practice bloodletting -- releasing quantities of blood from the body -- was thought to be a good treatment for diseases. We now know this to be completely misguided. The fact that many people believed the theory is not grounds for saying that it is true.
The consensus in ancient times was that the sun went around the earth. Again the widespread belief does not mean that it was true.
Consensus of Experts
The professional consensus of a group of experts is not a bandwagon fallacy. It does not prove correctness, but the consensus of experts in their area of expertise is the BEST possible source of information possible. This should be obvious.
- If you want to know how to train a tiger, you poll a group of tiger trainers.
- If a group of scuba diving experts agree that you should come back to the surface suitably slowly, this is the BEST source of accurate information.
- If you want to know the best way to repair leaky plumbing, you should ask a group of professional plumbers, and their consensus is likely to be the BEST possible source of information.
Which is why I specified biologists. A professional biologist who has worked 10 to 30 YEARS in the field would certainly have noticed if there were problems with the theory of evolution. Of course, there are always a few who get anything wrong. The fact that an overwhelming majority -- 99% -- accept evolution is in fact a valid consensus. The apologists don't like this, so they invoke the trick.
Tricking the Believers
Christian apologists use this trick by saying "A majority does not prove anything, only that many have that opinion." without considering whether the group being polled is an expert or not. They equate a group of non-experts with a group of expert. They use this trick when they disagree with the opinion of the experts, and this is a way to undermine the experts, and to fool the public into believing something else that the experts don't agree with.
They point out accurately times that people (including scientists) have been wrong in the past. Again, they often blur the distinction between the common crowd and the experts. They make these statements confidently and often to the point where gullible people will copy and paste the same argument profusely.
The apologist would actually like Christians to believe a bandwagon fallacy, and that is that millions of fundamental Christians -- who lack expertise in biology -- don't accept evolution. Christian believers are inclined to go with the bandwagon, even though the experts disagree.