Sorry, that happens not to be the case.
I know the creationist websites keep claiming that, but they have been known to distort, misrepresent, and selectively quote, as well as to ignore evidence which contradicts their beliefs.
If you are looking for accurate portrayals of what science is discovering, creationist websites should not be high on your list of sources.
Throwing around terms like ‘creationists’ or ‘creationist sites’ is a cheap trick. I have never visited a ‘creationist site’, and I believed in Darwinism most of my adult life until I learned of the advances in microbiology and remembered my statistics.
I know the creationist websites keep claiming that, but they have been known to distort, misrepresent, and selectively quote, as well as to ignore evidence which contradicts their beliefs.
If you are looking for accurate portrayals of what science is discovering, creationist websites should not be high on your list of sources.
Of course the evolutionist's web sites are the epitomy of truth and accuracy, aren't they?
HOGWASH! The very same can be said for evolutionist web-sites. A large segment of the evolutionist community is made up of a bunch of scared, grant-begging frauds who have cornered the market on a nice sounding theory, shown that it looks kinda logical, and will damned well brook no interference with their claims of having proven it as THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN.
And they do not hesitate to publish a bunch of lying, twisted twaddle to keep the scam going and the cash cow mooing.
Scientists?? True scientists do not arbitrarily call any and all other theories or hypotheses un-scientific without adequately backing up the claim. They do not claim that there is no way that other ideas may even be a part of what they are observing and investigating. No, they have staked their claim on the whole field -- claiming anyone who seriously advances an opposing theory to be either a deluded fool or an outright charlatan.
I'm sure glad I'm not that closed-minded.