Replies

I get it..."scientists" cannot be creationists and "creationists" cannot be paleontologists.

Science involves a specific method, the scientific method.

Creationists are generally unable to adhere to the scientific method because of their beliefs.

A good example is the "scientists" at the Creation Research Society. The CRS has the following on their home page:

The Creation Research Society is a professional organization of trained scientists and interested laypersons who are firmly committed to scientific special creation. The Society was organized in 1963 by a committee of ten like-minded scientists, and has grown into an organization with an international membership.

Lets see what else they say.

CRS Statement of Belief

All members must 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 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 and women of science who accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The account of the special creation of Adam and Eve as one man and one woman and their subsequent fall into sin is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a Savior for all mankind. Therefore, salvation can come only through accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior.

Does this sound like science to you? Does this sound like the way to do research?

Any time preconceived beliefs, such as these, override the scientific method, an individual is doing apologetics, not science. It doesn't matter what scientific degrees one may have; to agree to a set of standards such as this, which is common (whether explicit or implicit) in creationist circles, and which violates the scientific method, is to cease doing science.

With beliefs like this, most creationists despise sciences like paleontology, and they don't tend to go into them. (And as we see here on FR, many creationists know very little about the sciences they dispute.)