Creation Muesum

[downbeatplumb]

There isn't, and can't ever be, "Christian" science.  Christianity is fundamentally the antithesis of science, no matter how much Christianity would wish to give its primitive idiots superstition modern legitimacy by stealing the reputation of science.

I've always found this type of statement interesting.  Christianity is not the antithesis of science, and I'm amused by such generalities.  It seems that it is often made, based on the result, and not the method.  I believe this is incorrect, as the descriptor is based on the conclusion, while I believe science is more about method.  

Science is the collection of data through physical observance and testing.  Then from all the data, a conclusion or inference is made, and if possible further testing can be done to verify conclusions (not all science can be tested).  

I don't believe that a different interpretation of the evidence, means that the opposing view is not scientific (only that at least one view contains an error).  Ideally science is objective, and the data is analyzed without a priori assumptions or bias.  In reality this, is never the case.  However this doesn't mean that we are unable to produce good science.   What I look for is what the conclusion is based on, and if it is reasonable.  Do they include all the evidence, or only the evidence which supports their case?  Do they attempt an explanation for evidence which may oppose or cause difficulties in their conclusion?  Does the conclusion follow from the evidence or is it based on something else.   I would note, that the motivation for the study being based on a view outside of science, does not mean that the work is not scientific.  This would be the genetic fallacy.

There are some Christian's who try to force their views from outside sources into science when the conclusion is not primarily based on science.  I also see some materialist doing the same thing.  Science isn't the only basis for truth.  And we need to reconcile all the sources of truth, to get a true view of reality.

Science is the only basis for the truth of reality because, correctly done, it removes as much as possible bias. In science it is common to not try and prove a hypothesis but to disprove it. So what you get are scientists putting forward positions that would not be true if their hypothesis was wrong and check for that. Creationists take the exact opposite view, discarding anything that does not help their faith (I wont dignify it with hypothesis because it is too ill defined to qualify as one). They are the ultimate in the use of confirmation bias and outright lies.