the many reputable creation scientists have plenty of scientific rigor...they shouldn't be excluded from public schools. Maybe in a totalitarian state, but not in America.
They should be allowed to teach their stuff as though it were science when, and only when, it is actually accepted as science, and not before. This will take some doing. Here's an example I posted on another thread:
When an evolutionist is told that a genetic marker (ERV, pseudogene, etc) is found in the same place in the genome of pigs and cows, but is not found in horses, he can tell you that it will definitely be found in the genomes of deer, sheep, giraffes, hippos and whales, it will definitely not be found in the genomes of rhinos, elephants, people, platypuses, and porcupines, and that there isn't enough data to make a prediction about camels and llamas. (So far, all such predictions have been correct; ie ToE is falsifiable). Maybe DI or AiG could sponsor research to find examples where the ToE's predictions are falseNeither ID nor creationism will be taken seriously until they can answer questions like the above. And in hte meantime, why should something that's demonstrably weaker be taught at all? Affirmative action?If an anti-evolution activist, whether an ID-ist or a Biblical/Koranic creationist, is presented with the genetic marker that's present in pigs and cows but not in horses, just what exactly will his predictions be? How are they arrived at?
When the "reputable creation scientists" are doing CS or ID they are no longer scientists, they are apologists.
Scientists look at the natural world and try to figure it out.
Apologists defend existing religious beliefs.