You couldn't have this more wrong. In 1700, practically every scientist was what we would now call a creationist. As science corrected itself, it moved away from this position. One highlight along the way happened in 1831.
Adam Sedwick, religious to the core but a scientist as well, apologized for having dogmatically held on too long.
Having been myself a believer, and, to the best of my power, a propagator of what I now regard as a philosophic heresy, and having more than once been quoted for opinions I do not now maintain, I think it right, as one of my last acts before I quit this Chair, thus publicly to read my recantation.That's OK, Adam! Saying that in 1831, you're still 175 years ahead of one Miss American Pie.We ought, indeed, to have paused before we first adopted the diluvian theory, and referred all our old superficial gravel to the action of the Mosaic flood.... (Sedgwick, 1831, p. 312-314)
The trend is not your friend. How do you justify standing the chart on its head and pretending the down arrow is an up arrow?
That was then, this is now. As science has learned alot more than in the 1800's or 1900's, it has begun to conform more with scriptures. Don't deny it.
The Big Bang, the spontaneous appearance of certain species, polar ice melts, red tide, fish kills, global warming, light being the fundamental kick start, etc. It's silly to ignore the future, scriptures dictates, for the earth.