“Creationist” Perspectives p37-45 selections from Science Evolution and Creationism NAP 2008
“A creationist is someone who rejects natural scientific explanations of the known universe in favour of special creation by a supernatural entity. Many believers as well as many mainstream religious groups accept the findings of science, including evolution.
(Creationists) want to replace scientific explanations with their own religion’s supernatural accounts of physical phenomena.
Views of creationists typically have been promoted by small groups of politically active religious fundamentalists who believe that only a supernatural entity could account for the physical changes in the universe and for the biological diversity of life on Earth.
Old Earth creationists accept that the Earth may be very old but reject other scientific findings regarding the evolution of living things.
No scientific evidence supports these viewpoints.
The claim that the fossil record is “full of gaps” that undermine evolution is simply false.
The sequence of fossils across Earth’s sediments points unambiguously towards the occurrence of evolution.
Scientific conclusions are not limited to direct observation but often depend on inferences that are made by applying reason to observations.
The transitional forms that have been found in abundance since Darwin’s time reveal how species continually give rise to successor species that over time produce radically changed body forms and functions.
Science cannot test supernatural possibilities. To young earth creationists, no amount of empirical evidence that the Earth is billions of years old is likely to refute their claim that the world is actually young but that God simply made it appear to be old.
Intelligent design” creationism is not supported by scientific evidence. They argue that certain biological features are so complex that they could not have evolved through processes of undirected mutation and natural selection, a condition they call “irreducible complexity”, that the probability of all their components being produced and simultaneously available through random processes of mutation are infinitesimally small.
The claims of intelligent design creationists are disproven by the findings of modern biology. Biologists have examined each of the molecular systems claimed to be the products of design and have shown how they could have arisen through natural processes.
Even if their negative arguments against evolution were correct, that would not establish the creationists’ claims. There are many alternative explanations. Science requires testable evidence for a hypothesis, not just challenges against one’s opponents. Intelligent design is not a scientific concept because it cannot be empirically tested.
If there were serious problems in evolutionary science, many scientists would be eagre to win fame by being the first to provide a better testable alternative.
The arguments of creationists reverse the scientific process. They begin with an explanation that they are unwilling to alter – that supernatural forces have shaped biological or Earth systems – rejecting the basic requirements of science that hypotheses must be restricted to testable natural explanations.
If intelligent design creationism were to be discussed in public school, then Hindu, Islamic, Native American, and other non-Christian creationist views, as well as mainstream religious views that are compatible with science, also should be discussed.”