Why are scientist so easily enraged by creation belief?

Question

If creation is not true seems we can go to the grave without worry but if it's true.... Did anyone ever see a building without a builder?

Answer 1

Creationism is essentially a set of unsubstantiated assertions not of its adherents' creation. No original thinking was involved. No trying to make sense of the world. No perceptions as to what is happening around you and squaring that with theories currently in vogue.

More importantly, creationism onvolves no HERETICAL thinking. It actively discourages it and indeed any thinking for yourself by the young.

Whereas science is constantly questioning previously held theories and is ongoingly a heretical path to follow.

What happened to the phlogiston theory of combustion?

Oxygen was discovered by Lavoisier in 1778, it explained combustion rather better and the phlogiston theory was thrown out and overthrown.

What happened to the theory that the earth was flat?

The Greek scholar Eratosthenes in the 3rd Century BC demonstrated that it was a sphere, and even measured its diameter and circumference. The old theory was abandoned within a couple of hundred years as evidence accumulated from sailors of the curvature of the globe and Aristotle collated reports that the constellations rose higher in the sky from more southerly latitudes,

What happened to Ptolemy's view expressed in the Almagest on the 2nd Century AD that the Sun revolved around the Earth?

It took 1400 years to get there but when Copernicus theorised in 1543 that the Sun was at the centre of the Solar System, and the earth went round it. Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion, Newton's Laws of Gravity and Galieo's discoveries in 1610 of four moons orbiting the planet Jupiter and of the phases of Venus all were nails in the coffin of geocentrism, and within a couple of hundred years even the Roman Catholic Church realised the evidence was overwhelming and accepted heliocentrism.

Scientists seek truth. When an old theory which they thought was the truth, no longer fits the facts, they discard the theory and come up with a better theory that does fit the facts.

Creationists however disregard the inconvenient facts that emerge and stick to what they regard as the truth through hell and high water,

Wjay annoys people of a scientific turn of mind is the arrogance of Creationists in invading the science and mathematics pages and polluting them with their ideology. Pointless as that is, because the argument is already lost.

We don't invade the Religion and Spirituality pages and preach Darwinism or heliocentrism, do we? Mainly because we don't need the converts, the argument is already won.

So I suggest Creationists leave us well alone and stop insulting out intelligence with their ignorance of the universe and how it works.

If you take part in a Science discussion, do it within the parameters of that discussion i.e. that Scientific Method is how we resolve conflict between one theory and another.

Answer 2

Scientists aren't "enraged" about creationist "theories" if you even call them that, religious nut cases are enraged when science proves their precious books wrong.
What you're thinking is that since we can build things, we must have been built as well. That's not true, everything started from the tiny particles, which combined due to the forces into larger atoms and eventually into stars, planets, and even living beings. Nobody is there to put these particles together, or rip them apart, its just the forces of nature. You'll learn this if you study physics.

Also look at humans other living beings this way: Why are some so simple, like bacteria, and others so complex? If there was a creator, why would he/she not make everything simple? Why do we need to breathe, and specifically oxygen? Why do we need to eat and drink? Why do we have so many organs each responsible for a different task? Why do we have DNA, and everybody's different? Why does the human eye work the way it does, detecting only in the visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum, whereas some animals can see in ultraviolet and infrared? Why are there ao many different species of plants and animals? Why were earlier people different from us? Why are there animals native only to certain parts of the world, and some insects live only on specific trees? Same thing with some plants. Creationists cant's answer any of these questions because they don't look at the universe this way, they just think exactly like you do: "Anyone ever see a bulding without a builder?".
Put two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom close to each other and forces between them will pull the atoms together until they create a water molecule. Nobody glued the atoms together.

Answer 3

I don't know of any scientist who is enrage by creation BELIEF.

I do know a lot of people who are enraged when creationists act on their beliefs in ways that contravene the law and the constitution -- like trying to get their religious beliefs taught in the public schools, for example.

Want to see a building without a builder? Ever seen a snowflake? When a scientist creates a snowflake in the lab, is he commanding the hand of God to make it? Or is the creation of a snowflake the result of natural law working in natural ways?

Answer 4

The same reason Christians are typically enraged by Evolution. Two very different belief systems that people hold dear to. It is very hard for most people to examine and test what they "think" they know to be true. Whether or not the creation theory is how it happened or if it all started with a pool of organic goo that evolved into microscopic organisms doesn't matter.

We keep making two very serious mistakes, on one end are the people who say that people can believe whatever they want and that can be right for them...well that doesn't work...we should all search for truth. "Scientific advance, whether I prove myself correct or incorrect is STILL advance."

On the other end are the people who hold back those who challenge conventional systems. If no one ever challenged, we would grow stagnant. It is complete arrogance to think that our infant's undersanding of the universe allows us to say for certain what can and cannot be done. Until something is proven we should continuously test and challenge our understanding.

But the answer to your question is simple. Modern science doesn't understand creation. To the same effect, modern creationists cling to the, "Because God said so," defense WAY too much.

and FRESH PRINCE it's a little absurd to say that science has proven the bible wrong. More times than not it proves the other way around. I do agree that many Christians jump on to hair brained theories. You have to keep in mind that Evolution of Species, last time i checked is an accepted scientific Theory, but it cannot be SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN that creation is wrong. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

Answer 5

The Scientific Method is one of the greatest tools mankind has ever invented. It offers us the best way of reaching the best answer to any given question.

At its heart lies falsifiability. A million experiments can support a theory, but it only takes one expirement to cause the theory to collapse.

That means that at any given time, the current theory is the best possible answer available, however the possibility is left open that (with accumulated technology, knowledge and observation) someone, somewhere will come up with an even better explanation.

Creationism is not science. The reason being that its central premise is not falsifiable. You cannot disprove the existence of a Creator, just as you cannot disprove the existence of the Easter Bunny, the Loch Ness monster, Sasquatch or pixies at the bottom of my garden.

The reason that scientists get annoyed is because Creationists hijack the public perception of science. By implying that evolution is controversial (which it isn't) and not generally accepted by the scientific community (which it is), they give the general public a false impression about science.

Answer 6

The answer for this debate is to realize what happen to us when we are in adolescent.
When we was small, we only know who gave birth to us, they are our parents of course. But as you grow and become a teen, you will learn about the process, you will learn about sex and relationship. Learning this will eventually prepare you to become a parent in later days.
The same with us now, when our civilization was primitive, we know only that we are created by a Divine Creator, our God. But then humanity will want to know how God created us. That is why scientists create many theories about how God created the universe.
Just like the story about a bird carrying a baby that people may have told little kid, there are theories that incompatible with reality.
Denying God or denying evolution, are not what we should do, it is like denying that our parents exist or saying that our parents didnt do sex, like some child I know did.

We must place our concept about God and evolution in the right place. I believe that God created us, but I am not satisfied with that knowledge only, I want to know how. Although I believe about evolution, I dont believe that human are descendant of monkeys, this is analog to bird carrying a baby story.

There is a way this can be true, we must see how we think. Our thinking is actually using the same algorithm with evolution. Our brain will generate good idea and bad idea ,then bad idea a will die off, while good idea will survive, combining with other good idea, and becoming better idea, so evolution like isnt it?
When we create something we think, there is a process of evolution in our brain, evolution of idea. When we actually create the thing in real world, our creation is not the product of real world evolution. The evolution happen inside our mind, consciously and unconsciously.

Our body is the work of exceptional art, I believe that God have planned all things for our good. Thus we are the product of evolution, but not evolution in this world.

Answer 7

Scientists aren't enraged by creation belief. Some scientists are theists. Good scientists tend to ignore religion when they look at evidence, because it just doesn't play a role.

Scientists do tend to get annoyed when it comes to zealots trying to sneak religion into science teaching. But I haven't seen a lot of rage. Condescension is the more common attitude.

Answer 8

It's a question of epistemology: how do you know what is true? Science starts, more or less, with direct observation and attempts to build a consistent idea about the universe based on theory and observation. The scientific method does not guarantee understanding of all things, but some things have been explained and understood through hard work and intellectual effort. Creationists totally short-circuit this entire methodology through faith: they believe things are true because their faith says they are true, and not otherwise. When those "facts" collide with the way things are understood through the scientific method, it devalues the entire epistemological basis of the scientific enterprise.

Answer 9

It isn't your belief that enrages them so. It's the fact that you want your beliefs to be taught as science. Most, if not all, would be perfectly content to let everyone believe whatever fool things they chose to believe. The problem arises when fundamentalists want to inject their beliefs into the classroom, and for many, this is completely unacceptable, because beliefs are NOT science. And your comparison of a building to the universe is not at all accurate- buildings are built according to engineering principles; universes according to the principles of physics itself. Very different things.

Answer 10

There's nothing wrong with holding a creation belief so long as you recognize it's based on faith. And there's nothing wrong with faith either. Even in science, we have to take up some faith on theories. But you have to realize that science is more grounded in methods that can accurately determine the truth. Take for example, the Mickelson Morely experiment. They tried to prove the existence of the Ether. They failed, and managed to prove the Ether doesn't exist, but they came public with the fact. Creationism doesn't do this. It just says "This is how it is, end of story", no exlanations given.

Would you rather believe something based on facts, or just blindly choose to believe something, without any reason to prove it?