Creation Science Essay -- essays research papers

Creationism is a religious metaphysical theory about(predicate) the caudex of the trigger. It is non a scientific theory. Technically, creationism is not necessarily connected to any particular religion. It simply requires a judgement in a Creator. Millions of Christians and non-Christians believe thither is a Creator of the universe of discourse and that scientific theories such as the the theory of evolution do not conflict with belief in a Creator. However, fundamentalistic Christians such as Ronald Reagan and Jerry Falwell, have co-opted the stipulation creationism and it is now difficult to refer to creationism without being understood as referring to fundamentalist Christians who (a) take the stories in Genesis as accurate government notes of the origin of the universe and life on Earth, and (b) believe that Genesis is incompatible with the rangy peach theory and the theory of evolution. Thus, it is commonly assumed that creationists argon Christians who believe that the account of the creation of the universe as presented in Genesis is literally agentitative in its basic claims about Adam and Eve, the six days of creation, and not an allegory. Creation scientific discipline is a term used by reliable creationists to indicate that they believe that Genesis is a scientific account of the origin of the universe. Reading the Bible as if it were a scientific text contradicts the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution. "Creation scientists" say those theories are mistaken and that scientists who advocate such theories are ignorant of the truth about the origins of the universe and life on Earth. One of the main attractions of creation intuition is Duane T. Gish of the Institute for Creation Research, who puts forth his views in conjunction with attacks on evolution. Gish is the author of Evolution, the Challenge of the Fossil Record ( San Diego, Calif. Creation-Life Publishers, 1985) and Evolution, the Fossils Say No (San Die go, Calif. Creation-Life Publishers, 1978). Another leader of this movement is Walt Brown of the Center for Scientific Creationism. Neither Gish nor Brown await to understand the difference between a fact and a theory. They clamorously proclaim that evolution is just a theory and that it is false. Scientific theories are neither true nor false. They are explanations of facts. That species evolved from other species is considered by 99.99% of the scientific community of interests to be a scientific fact. How spec... ... act unscientifically, to be dogmatic and dishonest. exclusively the fact that one finds an occasional oddball in the history of science (or a person of integrity and genius among pseudoscientists) does not imply that there really is no difference between science and pseudoscience. Because of the public and experimental nature of scientific debate, the charlatans will be found out, errors will be corrected and the honest pursuit of the truth is likely to prevail in the end. This will not be the case with pseudosciences such as creation science, where there is no method needed for detecting errors (since it cant err) much slight of correcting them. Some theories, like creationism cant be refuted, regular in principle, because everything is consistent with them, even apparent contradictions and contraries. Scientific theories allow definite predictions to be made from them they can, in principle, be refuted. Theories such as the Big Bang theory and the knockout state theory can be tested by stick and observation. Metaphysical theories such as creationism are "airtight" if they are self-consistent. They ingest no self-contradictory elements. No scientific theory is ever airtight.