Author: Brett Vickers (bvickers@ics.uci.edu) Title: Creation Research Society Creed The Cr

===============================================================================
Author: Brett Vickers (bvickers@ics.uci.edu)
 Title: Creation Research Society Creed
===============================================================================

The Creation Research Society, established to promote and fund
"scientific" creation research, has a journal called the Creation
Research Society Quarterly.  It is one of the only journals (that I
know of) where creationists are able or have even tried to publish
their work.  On its board of directors are prominent creationists such
as Duane Gish, Henry and John Morris, Thomas Barnes, and Harold
Slusher.  The society and journal require that all members adhere to
the following statement of belief.

        Statement of Belief:  Members of the Creation Research
        Society, which include research scientists representing
        various fields of successful scientific accomplishment,
        are committed to full belief in the Biblical record of
        creation and early history, and thus to a concept of
        dynamic special creation (as opposed to evolution), both
        of the universe and the earth with its complexity of
        living forms.

           We propose to re-evaluate science from this viewpoint,
        and since 1964 have published a quarterly of research
        articles in this field.  In 1970 the Society published a
        textbook, _Biology: A Search for Order in Complexity_,
        through Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan
        49506.  Subsequently a Teachers' Guide and both Teachers'
        and Students' Laboratory Manuals have been published by
        Zondervan Publishing House.  All members of the Society
        subscribe to the following statement of belief:
           1. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it
        is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically
        and scientifically true in all the original autographs.  To
        the student of nature this means that the account of origins
        in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical
        truths.
           2. All basic types of living things, including man, were
        made by direct creative acts of God during the Creation Week
        described in Genesis.  Whatever biological changes have
        occurred since Creation Week have accomplished only changes
        within the original created kinds.
           3. The great Flood described in Genesis, commonly referred
        to as the Noachian Flood, was an historic event worldwide in
        its extent and effect.
           4. We are an organization of Christian men of science who
        accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour.  The account of
        the special creation of Adam and Eve as one man and woman and
        their subsequent fall into sin is the basis for our belief in
        the necessity of a Saviour for all mankind.  Therefore, salv-
        ation can only come through accepting Jesus Christ as our
        Saviour.

Note first of all that members are required to have a "statement of
belief."  To my knowledge, no major journal in any scientific
discipline requires its submissions be accompanied by a statement of
belief.  Such a practice is clearly anathema to the practice of
science.  As science is typically practiced, a hypothesis is put
forward, evidence is gathered to test the hypothesis, and the
hypothesis is modified or discarded if the evidence disagrees with it.
If continuous trials and evidence support the hypothesis, it may
become accepted by the community of scientists as a viable theory.  On
the other hand, statements of belief require adherents to begin with a
viable theory -- no, a fixed-in-stone conclusion (theories can be
modified or thrown out) -- and perform the evidence gathering
afterwards.  Persons ascribing to such statements of belief are not
supposed (or allowed) to alter their "theories" or "conclusions" if
evidence should contradict them.  By adopting a statement of belief,
the creationists have turned the practice of science on its head.

Surprisingly, these creationists do not attack accepted practices of
science surreptitiously; they are extremely blunt about the fact that
they have no respect or need for the practice of science as it has
existed for the last few centuries.  The first line of the second
paragraph reads, "We propose to re-evaluate science."  The ultimate
goal of "creation scientists" is not to have creationism accepted as
science; it is to have science accepted as creationism.  They would
like to "re-evaluate" science, since their results do not and cannot
possibly match the results good science is garnering.

Points 1 through 3 of the statement further reinforce the poor
scientific standing of creationism as it is expounded by the CRS, ICR,
Gish, Morris, et al.  These points require creationist to accept a
preordained conclusion without any scientific evidence and to
disregard any evidence that might oppose such a conclusion.  Note that
religion and theology play a central role in these points.  The
creation scientists would like to muddy the waters by intermingling
science and theology.

Point 4 makes the religious thrust of scientific creationism extremely
obvious, if points 1 through 3 did not.  No one does a better job than
the creationists at explaining why creationism should not be
considered good science.

I believe that creeds such as these breed poor science.  One need only
study the quality of the results that creationists produce to see that
creationists have a long way to go before they reach the acceptance of
mainstream scientists.  Unfortunately for the creationists, the
dishonest means by which they either advance their arguments or
attempt to discredit opposing arguments will not advance them very far
along that path.  Creationism will remain poor science until its
adherents give up constraining creeds like this one.