Atheists claim Creation Science isn't really science while creationists claim it is. Historically, which is correct according to the scientific community and why do they say this? I hope this is not off-topic, but I don't know where else to ask this.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ For what it's worth, there are probably a lot of people who are neither atheists nor creationists, and the scientific community surely includes people from each of these three categories (your two categories and the people not in either of your two categories). $\endgroup$ – Dave L Renfro Nov 30 '16 at 16:51
  • $\begingroup$ The question shows the general opinion of atheists and creationists. I want to know the scientific community in general has to say about. $\endgroup$ – A Child of God Nov 30 '16 at 17:04
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If you absolutely want to put it like that, then the scientific community sides with the atheists. $\endgroup$ – user2255 Nov 30 '16 at 17:31
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Atheists are not the only ones who believe that "creation science" does not meet the conventional definition of "science", as far as I know so do mainstream Catholics and other believers . In 1982 a US court ruled that creation science fails to meet the essential characteristics of science and that its chief intent is to advance a particular religious view after listening to a lot of expert testimony, US Supreme Court ended teaching of creationism in public schools based on a similar finding in 1987, and it was a relatively conservative court en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard $\endgroup$ – Conifold Nov 30 '16 at 20:26
  • $\begingroup$ This question is definitely off-topic here. Creation "science" is not a prat of science and not a prat of history of science. $\endgroup$ – Alexandre Eremenko Nov 30 '16 at 21:11

The "Scientific Community" is an abstraction, rather than an organized group with stated positions on things, so a strictly factual response on what they believe is probably impossible. No doubt there are scientists who believe Creation Science is valid science.

But several groups and organizations have addressed the question and found the negative. In the Court case Kitsmiller v. Dover Area school district, the court found ID wasn't a science, based in part on measures of the scientific community as a whole. And most of the relevant professional organizations for biologists have released statements against the idea that ID and Creation Science are sciences.

Just as an example, heres part of the American Institute of Biological Sciences statement on a Bush-era attempt to encourage ID in the classroom:

Intelligent design is not a scientific theory and must not be taught in science classes," said AIBS president Dr. Marvalee Wake, a perspective shared by President Bush's science advisor, Dr. John Marburger III. On Tuesday, August 2, Marburger stated in an interview that "evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology" and "intelligent design is not a scientific concept.

Googling, you can find many other similar statements from both the AIBS and basically every other similar organization in the US.

So to the extent that the "Scientific Community" has a position on the subject, I think its pretty clearly that Creation Science is not a science.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Questions about creation "science" should not be answered here, but just removed. This is off-topic on this list. $\endgroup$ – Alexandre Eremenko Nov 30 '16 at 21:13

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.