Yahoo News recently published an article outing most of the 2016 Republican party presidential contenders as radical young-earth creationists. They practically go as far as to call them science-deniers, as do most people who do not understand the position. The smear campaign has begun. It seems as though Democrats have seen the success of calling out Republican candidates who make Biblical claims that are considered outside the public consensus. We saw this at work recently with Todd Akin, Richard Mourdock, and Paul Broun.
Although the next major election is still four years away, it seems that the liberals are not willing to hold off on continuing to paint Biblical Republicans as out of touch with the public. I guess I didn’t realize truth was supposed to be decided by popular vote. Beyond this there is a blaring inconsistency at play. Supposedly Republican who embrace a young-earth position should not be trusted to serve the public due to their obvious idiotic personal beliefs and apparent lack of education, YET I wonder if they realize the same Democrats pushing this idea are the ones praising the election of democratic Muslims in Congress. That’s right a larger percentage of Muslims believe in a young-earth than Christians! Uh-oh, back up the spin wagon a few paces.
Perhaps a focus on creation/evolution is merely a distraction that doesn’t affect actual policies. Perhaps this is really about Christianity. I don’t see them calling out the Muslim YECs. That might be politically incorrect! Perhaps the whole idea of YEC is not understood. It’s not about denying science. It’s not about lack of education at all. It’s about challenging the underlying assumptions at play.
Obviously science can only measure the natural world. The conclusions make sense based on that starting condition. Creationists have a different starting condition: supernaturalism. If God can intervene in the world as he wishes, and did intervene the way Genesis lays out (a 6-day rapid creation, a cursed world following original sin, and a worldwide flood), then that puts a big kink in the assumption of uniformity of natural history needed to reach the old-earth conclusions. In other words, the evidences for an old-earth are not absolute if the events of Genesis actually happened as written. The way we measure and observe things today would not be reliable during those scenarios, therefore the conclusions are also unreliable.
Ridiculing Christians who believe in a young-earth as unscientific is laughable once you take a few moments to see where they are coming from. Whether you agree with their conclusions or not, they’re not ignoring science, they are questioning the starting assumptions of naturalism and uniformity of nature. The greatest scientific discoveries have been made when people question the existing paradigm. Perhaps we should be giving them more credit than we do! As Bill Nye put it – we are the greatest scientifically-advanced nation in the world and also the nation with the highest concentration of creationists… sweet irony.