Does creationism have a scientific basis?

Question

Does creationism have a scientific basis?

Answer 1

It strongly depends on how you define Creation.

The earth is NOT 6000 years old.

We have scientific evidence to prove it.

The nonsense in a previous answer about the Big Bang show that they do not understand scientific evidence...

However, the creation story taken as a metaphor or poem is not so bad. Try watching Inherit The Wind (preferably the original movie with Spencer Tracy), the lawyer does an awesome job of arguing that the bible does not conflict with the scientific evidence, as long as you don't believe it literally.

To the guy who said this wasn't an astronomy question - I guess that depends on what evidence you are looking at....

Astronomical evidence backs up the age of the Earth as a reasonable number and helps to disprove the interpretation of the Bible that says the earth is young - so maybe this isn't a bad forum for this sort of thing...

Answer 2

Of course not. Creationism has never served as the basis for scientific investigations and creationists never publish in peer-reviewed scientific journals. No creationist has made a contribution to the progress of knowledge in the life sciences.

Even the courts, where the judges are not scientific geniuses, have repeatedly concluded that creationism is religion and not science.

See, for instance, http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/...

Answer 3

You ask an excellent question here.  Does creationism have scientific validity?  Can our findings of the way the universe operates an behaves prove or disprove that it was created?  Was it created by intelligent design?  If so, by who.what?

Since your question doesn't ask if "God" created the universe, and has a much more vaugness of an implied creator or creators, not necessarily "god-like" I think there is a possibility.

Unfortunately, I do not see anyway to put creationism through any tests that would follow the scientific method to either prove or disprove a created universe.  

Perhaps that's why religious aspects and theologies are so properly referred to as "faith."  

The only way to prove a creator exists, is to meet this creator.  And even in that case, if deep down you are a true skeptic, you could try to explain the meeting as a hallucination, or a dream, or a "not-real" experience, or that you were temporarily (or permanently) insane.

I'm not sure if there is a way to prove the non-existence of a creator either.  No matter how the universe came to be, unless it ALWAYS has been, it had to come from somewhere...  and the natural first question after figuring that out would be, "where did that 'someplace' come from?"  

Answer 4

http://www.creationevidence.org/

Answer 5

Creationism is based on the timetable written in the Bible. They use this to "timeout" each successive event that they say has occurred, from the moment the earth was formed, through Adam and Eve, and all their descendants.They don't rule out the existence of dinosaurs, but just squeeze their lifetimes in that original timetable.

Answer 6

well than, what scientific basis does the big bang theory hold? its become more of a belief than a scientific theory lately, because its impossible to replicate the big bang. give me a couple good, and i mean good reasons to believe the big bang. most facts attributed to the big bang have been proven false or discredited. while the romans thought that you had to wash hands in still water, the bible showed that it was better to wash in running water, only science has been slow and stupid.

Answer 7

None whatsoever.

Also, the gap between creationists and their grasp on reality is bigger than the gap between my *** and the Andromeda Galaxy.

Answer 8

Creationism has no scientific basis.

Creation science is just an attempt by a small and vocal group of religious radicals to use selected parts of science to support a religious answer they don’t want to give up.

Science starts with questions and works toward answers, religion starts with answers and is pretty much done then.

Modern creationism is not much different that the church trying to silence Galileo and will end up to be just as great an embarrassment eventually.

(EDIT) I gave Dave M thumbs down because he redefined the question from one of "scientific basis" to "scientific validity". This is typical of the approach of creationism. Change the question to get the right answer. The answer is the start and end, all else is altered to fit the preexisting answer, right or wrong.

Answer 9

Short answer: no.

Long answer: Creationism is a pseudo-scientific attempt to being Christianity into the science classroom by claiming that science doesn't have all the answers (and that this makes science "wrong"). It uses half-truths and deceit, spurious redefinitions of scientific terms ("just a theory", anyone?) and blatant lies to try and discredit true science. It does not hold itself up to scientific scrutiny and has no place in science.

Answer 10

no.

it explains nothing, nor does it make experimentally testable predictions. it is not scince. it is superstition.

Answer 11

None at all.  True science looks at the facts and draws conclusions from what they find, creationism already has it's conclusion and tries to mold the facts to fit it.

Answer 12

No

Answer 13

No. It also has nothing to do with astronomy & space, so I wonder why you're asking here?