Bunk. Quite to the contrary, they tend to stress the scientific method. Which becomes problematic for mainstreamers. Makes them look bad.
Creationists start with an immutable belief (a dogma - in this case Genesis) and then they try to find facts that support it. But, regardless of whether or not they find any, their belief is NOT SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
I've seen this stated a number of times. Dave Rohl was accused of this when he provided proofs that should cause at a minimum a 300 year alteration in the historical timeline of the Egyptian Empire and a rewriting of history as to who Shishak was etc. That charge stood in the way of people listening to him. Yet his approach was to go into the field, gather the evidence - largely irrefuteable and present it. He couldn't even get a hearing in some quarters. Not because his data didn't pan out; but, because of ideology. They didn't want to hear what he had to say and largely were stuck in their own worlds. One frenchman would not look at his evidence regarding a pair of tombs situated beside each other at the site and rather wanted to work off drawings of the site which didn't clearly show the problem. This is called finding a way to avoid the facts no matter what the cost. What's more, it's on video tape for posterity. So it isn't a matter of accusation. You guys can hurl these accusations, I've seen the video. I've seen it first hand. And so has most of America and the world by now. You want to tell me another one? "Pharaohs and Kings: A Biblical Quest" By David M. Rohl. You can make claims, I can name specifics and provide direction to the proof of it.
I would only ask you to think about this - you don't have to answer me - simply ponder this within yourself. Is there anything, any evidence that could be presented to you that would make you change your beliefs? Are you even open to that?
I'm a Christian. And I'll define that. It means I'm a follower of Christ and his message. Not a follower of philosophy. Christianity is strictly defined. And among that is the immutable understanding of the accepting of all things that are irretrievably true. Denying something that is beyond a doubt true is the same as lying or deciet - both of which are sin. Passing on something that is either not true or may be false without due warnings is just as wrong. So the approach to all things in life is careful consideration of what is or is not true. If you have someone out there ignoring truth to state a claim, they ain't following Christian teaching. Which is why I find it gauling for people to say that christians don't follow scientific method. I would then have to wonder what you're defining as Christian or being allowed to be defined as Christian for you.
When you present me something that is at odds on it's face with something that is True. Then my immediate reaction is to reject it. If you told me that the Moon is made of cheese, immediate rejection. Some would believe it if their religious leaders so told them and would have no choice in the matter. Christians are not mind numbed robots who check their brains at the door. There are some who claim to be Christians that are that way; but, I'll not venture far down that path as I debate them regularly.
You'll never convince me that something I know beyond a doubt is true is other than true. Period. If I have question about something or if I don't know something, all one has to do is prove their case. But, Kirk, Spock and Scotty are all fictional Star Trek Characters. That is absolutely true. If you come to me trying to tell me they're real, you have a very tall burden of proof to meat before I call the nuthouse to come get you and help you find reality again. I'm fair; but, I'm also demanding. I don't let people get by with anything when high stakes are involved. I can't think of any higher stakes than peoples souls. So unless you can prove evolution beyond a shadow of a doubt, I'm sorry, I have to reject it. Even if I weren't a christian, that would have to be my approach. I've spent too much of my life being burnt by people's lies. I have no more use for swindlers.
Repeat after me: Science can never prove anything. The best it can do is say that, based on all available evidence, the theory has not been disproven.
If you reject that notion, then there really is no point in continued conversation.
Quite to the contrary, they (creationists) tend to stress the scientific method.
How can you simultaneously take both of these positions?? Do you realize that they are completely contradictory!! Have you been taking logic lessons from John Kerry?
Please do yourself a favor and read about the scientific method. I promise God will look at you with kindness for putting one of his greatest gifts (your brain) to good use. Here's a link to get you started.