As I mentioned in my previous post, Opal Formation – An Example of “Creationist” Research, anti-creationists can not get past the name “Creation Science” because they have a simplistic, inaccurate view of what this term means, and they reject the idea of it a priori. As I alluded, Creation science operates on the same scientific principles as naturalistic science, but has differing underlying assumptions, i.e. different underlying philosophies of science.
A Theory of Creation: A Response to the Pretense that No Creation Theory Exists outlines the differences between the two views of science, and how creation science is both scientific, and superior as a scientific model. Any anti-creationist who wants to move past low-brow mockery of creation science ought to start by understanding this article.
And here’s a sample:
