Does creation science pose a serious challenge to evolution?

Answer 1

No. Everything that creationists have ever pointed to that might disprove evolution has never pointed to creationism being true.

Creationists have given examples of things that they think can disprove evolution. For example, the person before me posted this, "recently they found a fossilized miners hat only thirty years old." I would like to point out that the hat wasn't a fossil, it was made of concrete. Also scientists have known for decades that fossilization can occur rapidly (i.e. Le Brae Tar Pits). And he also posted this, "(Creation scientists) have many scientific facts and things that definitely pose a problem to the evolutionist position." However there is no mention to what that is and everything that has thus far been reportd in a creation magazine has been refuted and debunked.

It is commonly said that "With DNA research, the once thought closeness of man to chimpanzees is now lower than 75% genetically," but that is not true. The genetic "closeness" of humans and chimpanzees is still about 95%. And lastly, "The scientific understanding of the circulatory system shows that the intake and release of oxygen and carbon dioxide too complicated under normal conditions, that would make a warm blooded mammal cease existence, if the intricate balance God created did not exist from the start." However that, also, is not true.

Answer 2

In the eyes of Evolutionists? No. They state that there is no genuine creation-science.
Creationists themselves say that they don't need to work too hard, because Evolution reveals its own weaknesses.

Answer 3

Initially, creationism developed as a response by a minority of Christians to the Theory of Evolution. Its advocates attempted to have Creationism taught, in US schools, in science classes as a valid alternative to evolution. The courts blocked this attempt, on the grounds that Creationism is a topic of religion and to teach it in science classes would breach the separation of church and state. Creationism evolved, with a new name "Creation Science" to suggest that it was now a science. However, the courts continued to maintain that it was a topic of religion, not science. In 1999, the "Wedge Document" prepared by the creationist Discovery Institute was leaked to the Internet. After initially denying it, the Institute confirmed the document's authenticity.

The document goes on to say that the Institute seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies, with a governing goal to replace materialistic explanationswith the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God. The achievement of these goals is to be facilitated by including Creation Science or Intelligent Design hypotheses in the school curriculum. This certainly suggests that creation science was intended to pose a serious challenge, at least to the widespread acceptance of evolution.

The Discovery Institute identified the following five-year goals (2004):

• To see intelligent design theory as an accepted alternative in the sciences and scientific research being done from the perspective of design theory.
• To see the beginning of the influence of design theory in spheres other than natural science.
• To see major new debates in education, life issues, legal and personal responsibility pushed to the front of the national agenda.

Twenty-year goals (ie 2019) were identified as :

• To see intelligent design theory as the dominant perspective in science.
• To see design theory application in specific fields, including molecular Biology, biochemistry, Paleontology, physics and cosmology in the natural sciences, psychology, ethics, politics, theology and philosophy in the humanities; to see its innuence in the fine arts.
• To see design theory permeate our religious, cultural, moral and political life.

It would be fair to say that none of the five-year goals has been met. A five-year objective of two universities where design theory has become the dominant view has also not been met, if the objective refers to mainstream accredited universities, rather than Christian colleges and seminaries.

As of 2016, it seems most unlikely that intelligent design theory will be the dominant perspective in science by 2019, or that the other twenty-year goals are in prospect.

By the standards set by the Discovery Institute itself, creation science does not pose a serious challenge to the Theory of Evolution. The United States has one of the highest levels of public belief in biblical or other religious accounts of the origins of life on earth among industrialised countries, but this has remained more or less unchanged at 45 per cent for the last several years. In contrast, a recent survey in Iceland was unable to find any respondents who believe in biblical or other religious accounts of the origins of life on earth. The science is safe.