Do you agree? that answers in genesis website claims the following. Secular and reation scientsts start with?

Question

with the same data and reach different conclusions because they have different presuppositions.

the idea being that secular scientists begin with the presupposition of naturalism and creation scientists begin with the presupposition of theism.

do you think this is true?

Personally, I feel this is a distortion of the truth.

I have very solid reasons for my opinion but I will keep them quiet so as not to bias the answerers.

hey reportbot, maybe you don't understand the difference between a genuine question and propaganda.

I hate that i have to explain this every time..but I do not believe the answers in genesis position is correct.

However, to clarify, what they mean is this

scientists and creationists but know that thing fossils and DNA are real but how they interpret the data is based on what presuppositions they have.

Answer 1

No, I believe that that is not true. Science deals with (or at the worst, tries to) work with unbiased facts. Findings are published and scrutinized by peers and this limits findings from being skewed by presuppositions. In the cases that one or more scientists have made a mistake, it is often found and the findings retracted.

Answer 2

You say that you have two different sets of scientists starting with the same data and forming different conclusions and that this is the result of bias. Perhaps for one group.

What you would do in that case is examine the data and see where the flaws are.

Secular science has data from the fossil record, the geologic record, DNA, comparative anatomy, and genetics research. This data has been compiled over the past couple of centuries and thousands of different scientists have contributed to it.

Religion science has data from the bible.

The thing is, there is no data to back up a creation story. The only attempts at science I have seen creationists pull out is to attack the data that supports evolution. However, I have never seen them produce data that shows creation to be correct.

How do fossils back up the creationist viewpoint? Fossils can only show that life existed a long time ago and that there are animals that roamed the earth that are not here today. Fossils also show a lineage of animal types and how animals of one type slowly changed into an animal of another type. Fossils do not back up the creationist story of the earth. That is why many creationists try to invalidate fossils by claiming that they are younger than what science shows.

Answer 3

Secular scientists would see what conclusions the facts lead them to, and if necessary, adjust or discard any presuppositions they may have had.

Scientists that support creation would discard any facts that lead them away from their desired conclusions.

Edit: dbytz I have been on a fruitless search for one of those peer-reviewed Creationist Science journals you alluded to. Where can I find those?

Answer 4

The scientists of the nineteenth century started with a presumption of theism but found that naturalism was there instead. Look up the histories of William Paley, Philip Gosse, Charles Kingsley and Charles Darwin. None of these men started out as doubters in God.

Answer 5

I have yet to meet any scientist, Secular or Christan, who doubt evolution. They may have a doubt about an aspect but none doubt the whole thing.

I have yet to meet any scientist, Secular or Christan, who finds the whole concept of creationism totally abused.

Answer 6

all i know is that scientists look at the evidence and say what conclusion can we come up with this?

and christians come up with a conclusion and say "what facts are out there that support this?"