[hopespringseternal]

Are you seriously suggesting that there is a vast undercurrent of creationists in the sciences, who are afraid to speak up lest they lose their paychecks? That's the best tin-foil argument I've heard in months.

Try to contain your prejudice. That is not what I said at all.

All the disciplines I listed have an underpinning of evolution. People who believe the world is 4000 years old don't make very good geologists or astronomers.

Last time I checked, the theory of evolution was fashioned to fit observations in geology and astronomy. Since observations in astronomy and geology can't very well be manipulated for the benifit of evolution. You are confusing the tail and the dog.

No reputable scientists truly believe in strict creationism as an explanation for the universe.

Why not? The universe is so vast it is impossible for me to comprehend even the size of my tiny little corner of it. It would be a boring and limited place indeed if my beliefs and observations formed closed circle with our puny amount of knowledge.

[VadeRetro]

Last time I checked, the theory of evolution was fashioned to fit observations in geology and astronomy.

If Darwin weren't alreadly long dead, this would do it.

[jonno]

The universe is so vast it is impossible for me to comprehend even the size of my tiny little corner of it. It would be a boring and limited place indeed if my beliefs and observations formed closed circle with our puny amount of knowledge.

Bingo