The conflict between science and creationism has a long history, going back hundreds of years. At the core of this conflict are fundamentally different worldviews about how the universe and life came to be. The scientific community is largely aligned with naturalistic evolutionary concepts, while creationists hold to a supernatural creation account described in the Bible.
There are several key reasons why most scientists oppose creationism:
1. Creationism is seen as unscientific
Science relies on the scientific method – objective observation, measurement, experimentation, formulation and testing of hypotheses. Scientific theories must be falsifiable and supported by evidence. Creationism is viewed by scientists as resting on faith and divine revelation rather than a systematic analysis of the natural world. The creationist view cannot be tested or falsified scientifically, and so is rejected as pseudoscience by the mainstream science community.
“For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” – Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers
2. Perceived incompatibility with evolution
The science community overwhelmingly accepts biological evolution as the explanation for the origin and development of life on earth. Creationism is seen as incompatible with evolutionary theory. The evolutionary timeline, with life unfolding over billions of years of natural selection and mutation, contradicts the creationist belief in instant supernatural creation of life by God over the course of six days.
“Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” – Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research
3. Dismissal of flood geology and young earth claims
Creationists argue for a young earth based on genealogies and a worldwide flood described in Genesis. Mainstream scientists reject young earth creationism and flood geology as pseudoscience, pointing to conclusive geological evidence of an ancient earth billions of years old. The claims of creationists about a young earth and global flood are seen as contradicting established scientific facts.
“The canopy theory is as worthless as the ‘flat earth’ theory. The intense heat from that much water surrounding the earth would boil off the oceans.” – Larry Vardiman, Astrophysicist
4. Rejection of supernatural explanations
Science restricts itself to naturalistic explanations that rely on physical cause and effect. Appeals to the supernatural are avoided. But creationism explicitly posits a supernatural creator as responsible for aspects of cosmic and biological origins. This divergence in explanations for origins is an impasse between the two worldviews.
“A supernatural creator and miracles are unscientific, as they cannot be falsified. But the God hypothesis should not be dismissed or discounted. Perhaps future discoveries will provide scientific evidence for God.” – Stephen Hawking
5. Historical conflicts and opposition
There is a long history of hostility and opposition between naturalistic science and the biblical supernatural worldview. Events like the Catholic persecution of Galileo for his heliocentric views left lasting impact. Many scientists came to see organized religion as hindering free scientific inquiry and theories that contradict theology.
“I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity…” – John Dunphy, The Humanist magazine
6. Perceived threat to scientific naturalism
Scientists worry that allowing supernatural explanations like creationism into science will open the door for all kinds of religious dogma to be taught as science. This would undermine the naturalistic foundation of the scientific method. So the science community seeks to exclude creationism to protect the integrity of science.
“It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).” – Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker
7. Concerns over replacing science with faith
Scientists argue creationism and intelligent design theory aim to replace materialistic explanations with biblically-based faith. They see this as a dangerous infringement of theology into science education. Attempts to undermine or eliminate the teaching of evolution are viewed as religiously motivated attacks on science itself.
“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs…” – Richard Lewontin, geneticist
8. Disagreement over validity of flood legends
Creationists point to global flood legends as supporting evidence for a worldwide deluge as described in Genesis. But secular scientists explain such ancient flood accounts as referring to localised flooding. They also argue legendary parallels with the Genesis flood arose simply because flooding is a common human experience.
“The worldwide flood legends are exactly what we would expect if the Genesis flood was merely a local flood. Legends derived from the same local event would differ according to the culture of each tribe.” – Hugh Ross, astronomer
9. Concerns about discernment between science and scripture
Scientists argue creationists lack discernment about what parts of the Bible are meant to be read literally versus metaphorically. They accuse creationists of insisting upon a literal six day creation and young earth without sound justification. This raises concerns about creationists’ ability to distinguish science and theology.
“When men cease to fight over religious dogma they often start fighting over scientific theories. Intolerance shifts from popes and kings to experts and professors.” – Ernest Sosa, philosopher
10. Disagreement over ‘kinds’ and microevolution
Creationists assert God created distinct ‘kinds’ of plants and animals which can undergo microevolution but never change from one ‘kind’ to another. But secular scientists point to evidence that accumulation of microevolutionary changes over time has resulted in macroevolutionary changes producing new species, genera and families.
“As new species are formed through reproductive isolation, the process cannot be stopped. This refutes the idea that each species was specially created by God and will not change.” – Tim Berra, biologist
In summary, the science community opposes creationism primarily due to conflicting worldviews and methodologies. Scientists aim for naturalistic explanations rather than invoking divine intervention. There is disagreement between both camps on issues like evolutionary science, interpretating Genesis and the age of the earth. Ongoing mutual mistrust and perceived threat exacerbate these longstanding conflicts.
The creationism versus evolution debate is a reflection of the tension between faith and naturalism in explaining origins. But productive dialogue is still possible between people of science and faith. Both creation and evolution contain unprovable assumptions requiring a measure of belief. Science itself rests on faith principles it cannot logically prove. True wisdom comes from humbly acknowledging the limits of both theology and science in pursuit of deeper shared truth.
“Science and religion are not at odds but simply speak to different realms. Science speaks to physical cause and effect, while religion considers metaphysical meaning and purpose.” – Mary Beth Tallon, biochemist
The creation perspective enriches science by underscoring the world’s divine origins and care. Scientific inquiry helps us appreciate the unsearchable complexity of God’s creation. Genesis provides the supernatural framework for cosmic and biological origins, while science investigates the physical processes within that framework. Both offer complementary insight to answer life’s deepest questions.
There are thoughtful scientists open to carefully considering intelligent design and creation evidences. And there are discerning creationists acknowledging science’s important discoveries. As we share God’s love with humility, and pursue unity over controversy, space can open up for sincere dialogue and progress.
“A great portion of the Bible is merely history or poetry. It’s not a science textbook. The Bible is here to tell us how to get to heaven, not how the heavens go.” – Jimmy Williams, apologist
Science and faith each have indispensable roles to play in human flourishing when exercised constructively together. May we thoughtfully engage in this ongoing journey of reflection. And “speak the truth in love” as we test all theories against God’s eternal spiritual and natural revelation.