Do creationist ever do any of there own research or do they just criticize the scientific community?

Question

I was wondering. Do creationist 'scientists' (I use that word VERY loosely.) ever go out and do some digging of there own? Do they ever bother going out and doing some actual research for themselves? Or are they a bunch of armchair 'scientists' who just sit back and misinterpret the work that other people do?

If there are some that actually do go out on digs, do they bring their bibles with them to tell them where to dig?

Father Bob Marley - Do you cut and paste everything in life?

san_ann - what proof?

Answer 1

Yes there are plenty who go out and dig on their own. And sometimes they do bring their bibles to tell them where to dig. They read the bible to say where the civilization was and dig there. The bible is a history book. Now the writers did add religious overtones to what they saw (whether that came from God or not is up to you to decide) but they did fight those wars or lived the way the Bible describes them as living. And the archeologists that do this to find the right place to dig are extremely accurate at finding the proofs of civilization and almost (if not completely) as described in the bible.

And remember that evolution doesn't answer all the questions. For example, if chimps are good enough to survive, and humans are good enough to survive, why wasn't everything in between good enough to survive. There are many missing peices, that may mean they just haven't been found yet, or it may mean they will never be found because they don't exist. Also, the big bang theory (while possible) doesn't explain where all the material that was compacted to the point of explosion came from. Besides, God and evolution don't have to be exclusive (they may be, may be not, only God knows if He exists) God may have chosen evolution as his way of creating life.

Darwin came up with the theory not to disprove God, but as a way to explain why God would allow any one of his creations to die (extinction). The dodo and the passenger pigeon among others had died out at a time when everyone hunted them to extinction because they assumed God wouldn't allow them to die. Darwin said God came up with natural selection to weed out the weaklings and made sure that life itself continued rather than just all species.

Remember that both creationism and evolutionism are theories (hypotheses with some proof but not enough to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that that is how it happened) and you need "faith" to believe in either one. Don't act like creationists are stupid just because their ideas are in the minority in science right now.

Answer 2

well that is a very lose term because their are several kinds if creationists. Some believe God created everything while others believe some other force or being did it. They do go out and do their own research, although the ones who jip off others have covered up that fact. And the bible isnt a psychic book. If it told where to dig, I'd be digging everyday!! But some scientist actually have real facts the have found that creationsists agree with.

Answer 3

Creationists aren't scientists. Some of them have had a science education, but they don't practice the scientific method. Instead, they read the Bible and assert that everything written there was inspired by God and therefore must be true. I think that Creationist groups actually have in their bylaws something about never adjusting their dogmatic views to account for new information.

What they do with science is find fault when science corrects itself by finding, through experimentation, an error in theory, then modifying the theory to a better accord with the evidence. Why weren't those "evolutionists" right the FIRST time? Maybe if they keep on finding MISTAKES like THAT one, they'll end up coming right back to the BIBLE where WE ALWAYS WERE!

That's their general attitude.

The importance of scientific statements is that they've been sifted, again and again and again for centuries, by people who test them and check them for accuracy.

Dogma (such as religious scripture) is never tested. All the errors and outright lies there were present in dogma at the beginning more or less remain there. To a dogmatist, the truth of his dogma isn't subject to testing because it's a "higher" truth, it's "sacredly" true, and if you don't believe it, then you're going to Hell.

Lies and propaganda are often used to organize and/or to exploit large numbers of people. Religion is just one more means of doing that.

Answer 4

Creationists almost never do their own scientific research relevant to creationism. The vast majority of creationist literature consists of rhetorical attacks against and misrepresentations of legitimate science. There are a handful of very rare examples of creationists actually doing some empirical research, but then they never follow through by writing up this research formally and submitting it to professional science journals to be examined and evaluated by professional scientists who are trained and work in the relevant field of science. Creationists know that their work doesn't really pass the standards of professional science, so they stay away from it, and only promote their "research" among religious people who already agree with their religious doctrine and don't know much about the science anyway.

Answer 5

???? you've got to be kidding

Some of the best scientists in the world are creationists, and this has always been so. Werner Van Braum who founded Nasa was a 6 day creationists and was harldy the only one.

There is excellent research on

- the inventor of the MRI is a creationist
- the ice age by Oard
- plate techtonics by Baumgartener
- information science by Werner Git
- biochemestry and dna by Dewitt
- the RATE team an 8 year study on Radioisotopes and the Age of the earth is FACINATING
- a new theory of Time by Russ Humphreys in starlight and time
- a new theory of Relativity by Carneli
and many many fiedls

www.answersingenesis.org

Answer 6

I've never heard of them doing any.

The entire creationist strategy is based on a false dichotomy. They think that if they prove evolution false, then creationism must be right.

The most I have seen them do is pick and choose research that has already been done. If it supports their viewpoint, they promote it. If it doesn't they discredit it.

I did see a transcript of a debate at a local college, about whether creationism should be taught in schools, where this exact point was brought up. The evolutionist's opening statement was basically "for the sake of this debate, lets assume that evolution is entirely false. what evidence is there that proves creationism is true?" The creationist had to throw away most of his notes and wing it for the rest of the debate, as 95% of his argument was to simply discredit evolution.

Answer 7

Yes they have. When they find hard evidence to support the Creation Science - the atheists start questioning their credentials steering attention away from the findings and go all out to assassinate their character - then walk off smug, knowing they once again stopped people from believing in the true science of Creation and keeping minds stabilized on the erroneous evolution lie that they themselves believe just as did the Roman Catholic Church, ruining anyone who challenged their beliefs.

I seriously believe if the secular could (some of you anyway) would have Creationists locked away for heresy.

Answer 8

Did Father Bob answer the wrong question? Creationists have absolutely no proof of anything but a book full of things Humans said and did in the past. They attack the Scientific Community rather than embrace it because they suffer from "Pride" One of the seven deadly sins!

Answer 9

FatherBob you dipshit, try sticking to the topic.

Yes, many creationists do research. Unfortunately, much of it is aimed at proving a preconcieved notion, like the research project where "human footprints" were found alongside dinosaur ones.

Research was done extensively by both camps, and it was ultimately decided that they were not human, but the print of a dinosaur with elongated feet that made a print much like a primate, but was far too thin to be homo sapien. However, this argument, while disproved, remains a strong creationist stronghold against the old-earth theory.

Answer 10

Despite your rather closed view which seems to be a little like what your arguing against, creation scientist have done research including experimental work that does allow most if not all of modern scince to fit comfotably with religion. Some creationists aren't out to debunk science but rather to find a way for them to co-exist it's just that they dont publish books or rant in congress