Do Creationists Reject Science?: Anyone familiar with the creation/evolution debate should know that anti-creationists love to lob the accusation that creationists are "anti-science" or that they "reject science." Evolutionists frequently label creationists "flat-earthers" and even go as far as suggesting that consistent creationists should deny the law of gravity! What’s more, these assertions are sometimes made with the implication (or outright allegation) that creationists are openly anti-science. So, for those who haven’t already made up their minds before hearing us out, are we truly against science? Not at all! Answers in Genesis (like other creationist groups) affirms and supports the teaching and use of scientific methodology, and we believe this supports the biblical account of origins. So why all the disagreement? Much of the problem stems from the different starting points of creationists and Darwinists. Everyone, scientist or not, must start their quests for knowledge with some unprovable axiom—some a priori belief on which they sort through experience and deduce other truths. This starting point, whatever it is, can only be accepted by faith; eventually, in each belief system, there must be some unprovable, presupposed foundation for reasoning (since an infinite regression is impossible). For Bible-believing Christians, God’s Word is our starting point: our presupposed foundation through which we interpret and balance fallen man’s ideas, including those derived scientifically. Although some may consider this a foolish faith, everyone has such faith in something. But which is foolish: faith in the unmovable Word of the omniscient creator God or faith in man’s fallible, changing ideas? (taken from www.answersingenesis.org e- newsletter, Feb. 9, 2008).
More from AiG–Is antibiotic resistance proof of evolution?: It is true that certain bacteria can become resistant to antibiotics. On the surface, this may seem like evidence for evolution. After all, these bacteria seemed to have "gained" something—a resistance which they didn’t have before. It’s easy to see how a student could be intimidated by teachers who push evolution by declaring that bacteria have gained a resistance. Thus, they supposedly evolved. But, when you study the matter at a molecular level and understand how this resistance came about, it becomes obvious that it has nothing to do with molecules-to-man evolution. Dr. Georgia Purdom explains, "Mutation and natural selection, thought to be the driving forces of evolution, only lead to a loss of functional systems. Therefore, antibiotic resistance of bacteria is not an example of evolution in action but rather variation within a bacterial kind." For evolution in the Darwinian sense to occur, an organism has to gain information—information that previously did not exist. Bacterial resistance has nothing to do with a gain of information: it can be inherited from information that already existed, there could be a loss of information, or there could be an exchange of previously existing information from another bacterium. However, none of this has anything whatsoever to do with molecules-to-man evolution. (taken from www.answersingenesis.org e-newsletter archives, Feb. 2, 2008).